Does the trial court abuse its discretion when it denied a defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of Page 35 of the Defendant's lawyer as more prejudicial than probative?

Nor, contrary to defendant's claim, did the trial court abuse its discretion when it denied his motion to exclude the testimony as more prejudicial than probative under Evidence Code section 352. Under this section, the court may exclude even relevant evidence if "its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will . . . create substantial danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury." (Evid. Code, 352.) We review the trial court's rulings under this section for abuse of discretion. (People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690, 724.) "The prejudice which exclusion of evidence under Evidence Code section 352 is designed to avoid is not the prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence.' . . . 'The "prejudice" referred to in Evidence Code section 352 applies to evidence which uniquely tends to evoke an emotional bias against the defendant as an individual and which has very little effect on the issues. In applying section 352, "prejudicial" is not synonymous with "damaging." ' [Citation.]" (People v. Karis (1988) 46 Cal.3d 612, 638.) The evidence that

Page 35