What is the test for excluding prejudicial or prejudicial evidence in a sexual assault case?

Even assuming the evidence had some relevance, we would conclude it was only minimally relevant, and agree with the trial court that any probative value was far outweighed by its potential for confusing the jury and consuming time as the parties would have had to adjudicate the facts of the subsequent events. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the evidence as substantially more prejudicial than probative. (See Evid. Code, 352.) Because there was no error under state law, appellants' constitutional claims also fail. (See People v. Linton (2013)

Page 22