and the district court agreed that the prosecutor’s use of the gun was inappropriate, particularly given that the firearm selected was not the Beretta Diaz-Correa allegedly possessed. The district court then instructed the jury “not [to] consider the pistol that was shown,” but allowed the prosecutor to make her point that a cell phone was unlikely to cause the bulge seen by Nuñez-Rivera. The term “prosecutorial misconduct” covers a broad swath of improper conduct by the state’s attorney that may impair an accused’s constitutional rights to a fair trial, such as commenting on an accused’s decision to remain silent, witness vouching, and introducing inadmissible evidence through cross-examination. See, e.g., Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 619-20, 96 S.Ct. 2240, 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Vázquez-Botet, 532 F.3d 37,
holding that it is improper for prosecutor to comment on accuseds postarrest silence holding fifth amendment prohibits comment on accuseds silence during police custodial interrogation holding a prosecutor may not comment on a defendants silence holding that the fifth amendment  forbids either comment by the prosecution on the accuseds silence or instructions by the court that such silence is evidence of guilt holding fifth amendment prohibits comment on accuseds testimonial silence