In People v. Lindberg (2008) 45 Cal.4th 1, the court expressly rejected the contention that error in admission of such evidence violated the defendant's constitutional rights: "We have long observed that 'application of the ordinary rules of evidence generally does not impermissibly infringe on a capital defendant's constitutional rights.'" (Lindberg, at p. 26.) As in Lindberg, "defendant fails to persuade us that his case presents an exception to this general rule." (Ibid.) The court went on to assess the error under the Watson standard. It then observed that the error was also harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under the Chapman standard. (Lindberg, at p. 26.)