What is the test for prosecutorial misconduct in a criminal case?

A defendant has a constitutional right to a fair trial (cf. People v. Coffman and Marlow (2004) 34 Cal.4th 1, 84) and prosecutorial misconduct can, when sufficiently egregious, operate to deny the defendant a fair trial. (People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 819.)

The applicable federal and state standards regarding prosecutorial misconduct are well established. " 'A prosecutor's . . . intemperate behavior violates the federal Constitution when it comprises a pattern of conduct "so egregious that it infects the trial with such unfairness as to make the conviction a denial of due process." [Citations.]' " (People v. Gionis (1995) 9 Cal.4th 1196, 1214.) "Conduct by a prosecutor that does not

Page 19

render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair is prosecutorial misconduct under state law only if it involves ' "the use of deceptive or reprehensible methods to attempt to persuade either the court or the jury." ' " (People v. Espinoza (1992) 3 Cal.4th 806, 820.) However, to preserve a claim of misconduct on appeal, a defendant must both object and request a curative admonition (People v. Montiel (1993) 5 Cal.4th 877, 914), and failure to do so forfeits the claim of misconduct. (People v. Silva (2001) 25 Cal.4th 345, 373.)