The prosecutor may engage in oratorical embellishment and metaphorical nuance. People v. Vialpando, 2022 CO 28, ¶ 23, 512 P.3d 106. But while the prosecutor can "comment on the evidence admitted at trial and the reasonable inferences that can be drawn therefrom," she cannot "misstate or misinterpret the law."

¶ 57 The prosecutor’s statements did mot mistate or oversimplify the burden of proof. See People v. Vialpando, 2022 CO 28, ¶ 41, 512 P.3d 106. Rather, the prosecutor’s line of questioning focused on the, task, the jurors would face: weighing the evidence presented to them.

¶ 67 The doctrine of cumulative error is based on the concept that multiple errors, in isolation, may be harmless, but the synergistic effect of multiple errors may be so prejudicial that the combined errors deprived a defendant of a fair trial. SeePeople v. Vialpando , 2022 CO 28, ¶ 33, 512 P.3d 106. ¶ 68 Here, Toro-Ospina alleges numerous errors.

The doctrine of cumulative error is based on the concept that multiple errors, in isolation, may be viewed as harmless, but the synergistic effect of the multiple errors may be greater than the sum of the individual errors and thereby so prejudicial that they deprive a defendant of a fair trial. See People v. Vialpando , 2022 CO 28, ¶ 33, 512 P.3d 106. ¶ 81

¶ 47 The doctrine of cumulative error is based on the notion that multiple errors, in isolation, may be viewed as harmless, but the synergistic effect of the multiple errors may be so prejudicial that they deprive a defendant of a fair trial. See People v. Vialpando , 2022 CO 28, ¶ 33, 512 P.3d 106. ¶ 48 Here, numerous errors were alleged.

¶ 52 Next, while we have found one error, and assumed an error for the purpose of analysis, we conclude no cumulative error occurred because the record established overwhelming evidence of guilt and thus, the cumulative effect of any error was slight. People v. Vialpando, 2022 CO 28, ¶ 46. Witnesses described Perez immediately shooting the victim, contrary to his self-defense claim, and the jailhouse calls and Perez's girlfriend's testimony showed

Therefore, the prosecutor's arguments, overall, were anchored in the evidence, not in emotion. See People v. McMinn, 2013 COA 94, ¶ 61 ("Prosecutors may comment on the evidence admitted at trial and the reasonable inferences that can be drawn therefrom."); see also People v. Vialpando, 2022 CO 28, ¶ 23 (recognizing that a prosecutor may use oratorical embellishment and metaphorical nuance). ¶ 52 In addition, the prosecutor's comments were fleeting within the context of closing argument and the trial at large.