What evidence is relevant and properly excluded in the retrial of a defendant in a sexual assault case?

We conclude that evidence of the acquittals in the first trial was irrelevant and properly excluded because the prosecutor proffered no evidence related to the counts on which defendant had been acquitted. Evidence that the jury in the first trial was unable to reach a verdict also was irrelevant and properly excluded. The jury would have had no basis to "decipher" the meaning of a hung jury, and during a retrial, the inability of a prior jury to reach a verdict does not make the " 'existence of any fact . . . more probable or less probable.' " (Yeager v. United States (2009) 557 U.S. 110, 121.) We affirm the judgment.