What is the test for exclusion of evidence in a criminal case based on evidence of gang membership?

pertinent to guilt of the charged crime." (Ibid.) "[E]vidence of a defendant's gang membership . . . should be carefully scrutinized by trial courts" because it "creates a risk the jury will improperly infer the defendant has a criminal disposition and is therefore guilty of the offense charged." (People v. Carter, supra, 30 Cal.4th at p. 1194.)

A trial court has discretion to exclude 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." ( 352.) "The prejudice which exclusion of evidence under . . . section 352 is designed to avoid is not the prejudice or damage to a defense that naturally flows from relevant, highly probative evidence. '[A]ll evidence which tends to prove guilt is prejudicial or damaging to the defendant's case. The stronger the evidence, the more it is "prejudicial." The "prejudice" referred to in . . . 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.)