Alaniz

*3 A jury convicted Ramon Alaniz on one count of assault likely to produce great bodily injury ( Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4) ). 1 Alaniz moved for a new trial based on juror misconduct. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that although jurors had committed misconduct by discussing Alaniz's failure to testify, the misconduct was not prejudicial. We conclude that because the trial court did not instruct the jury not to consider Alaniz's decision not *156 to testify, no misconduct occurred. We accordingly affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Prosecution's Case

This case has been tried twice. The first trial ended in a mistrial because the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. At that trial, the court gave the jury CALCRIM No. 355, which instructs the jury that it cannot consider the fact that the defendant did not testify. 2

*4 At the second trial, Linda Ryan testified that she and Alaniz had a romantic relationship 20 years ago. Beginning in 2012 they lived together in the home of Alaniz's parents. 3 Ryan testified that she and Alaniz shared the same bedroom, but he was "just a friend" and was not her boyfriend. In the early morning hours of July 2,…