In People v. Mitcham (1992) 1 Cal.4th 1027, at the penalty phase of his capital murder trial "defendant presented numerous witnesses who testified to his good character and reputation in elementary and junior high school. One witness testified defendant was a good student, kind to others, and respectful of his elders, and had been a class speaker at his graduation. Another witness testified defendant was an excellent student, highly regarded by others, and popular, and got along well with everyone; on cross-examination, this witness responded affirmatively when questioned whether defendant was honest, kind, and nonviolent." (Id. at p. 1072.) The Supreme Court held that, "the rebuttal evidence of defendant's acts of delinquency, including incidents of violence, directly related to this general picture of a well-behaved youth presented by the defense." (Mitcham, supra, 1 Cal.4th at p. 1072.) While rebuttal evidence must be limited to the specific character trait it is intended to rebut, "here defendant's good character evidence was not limited to any singular incident, personality trait, or aspect of his background. The defense evidence painted an overall picture of an honest, intelligent, well-behaved, and sociable person incompatible with a violent or antisocial character. The breadth and generality of this good character evidence warranted rebuttal evidence of the scope offered." (Ibid.)