When will the Attorney General's claim of misconduct be forfeited?

As an initial matter, the Attorney General contends these claims are forfeited, as no defense counsel objected at trial. We agree. ["'In order to preserve a claim of misconduct, a defendant must make a timely objection and request an admonition; only if an admonition would not have cured the harm is the claim of misconduct preserved for review.' [Citation.]"]. (See People v. Williams, supra, 56 Cal.4th at p. 671.) Because a timely objection and admonition could have cured any misconduct alleged, defendants may not raise these objections for the first time on appeal.

Defendants attempt to avoid their forfeiture by arguing the failure to object constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. We note that a decision to raise or forgo an objection during the heat of trial is generally a matter of trial tactics and we will not "attempt to second-guess trial counsel" except in rare cases. (People v. Frierson (1979) 25 Cal.3d 142, 158.) Here, where defendants have identified fleeting references that were, at most, somewhat questionable, we cannot say that there could have been no tactical reason not to highlight the statements (or to believe the statement did not constitute misconduct). We therefore reject the contention that trial counsel was ineffective on this basis. In any event, as detailed below, we find no misconduct occurred.