In People v. Bell (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 249, the delayed disclosure related to the testimony of three alibi witnesses. (People v. Bell, supra, 118 Cal.App.4th at pp. 253-254.) The appellate court found the giving of CALJIC No. 2.28 prejudicial because: (1) the prosecution's case (for murder) was based on "essentially two eyewitnesses," one of whom "had a fairly brief opportunity to see the assailant," and the other of whom "was impeached by the admission of evidence that she was a frequent liar and had suffered misdemeanor convictions"; (2) "the presentation of the defendant's alibi was a critical part of his case"; (3) "the prosecutor capitalized on the jury instruction at closing argument to discredit the defendant's alibi defense." (Bell, at p. 257.)