Does defendant have any grounds to argue that the Court of Appeal overturned a finding that a prosecutor improperly admitted evidence of sexual assault under section 352(b) of the California Evidence Code?

^6. As defendant points out, if the ruling depended on the trial court's interpretation of the Evidence Code, that is a question of law which we review independently. (People v. Walker (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 782, 795.) However, defendant does not contend that the trial court misinterpreted either Evidence Code section 1101(b) or Evidence Code section 352. Rather, he contends only that the trial court abused its discretion.

^7. And, in fact, the prosecutor did not make that argument to the jury.

^8. Defendant also contends that the admission of this evidence violated his federal constitutional right to due process of law and a fair trial. He did not make that objection in the trial court. In any event, because we have concluded that the evidence was properly admitted under Evidence Code section 1101(b), his constitutional claims, even if they are cognizable on appeal, fail. (See People v. Valdez, supra, 55 Cal.4th 134.)