Does a court have to balance the probative value of evidence against its potential prejudicial effect?

We discern no failure of the trial court to weigh the probative value of the evidence against its potential prejudicial effect. As defendant was given the opportunity to argue that the evidence was unduly prejudicial, and the trial court's ruling contained an explanation of its probative value, we assume that the trial court did, contrary to defendant's contention, weigh prejudice against probative value. Under such circumstances, the court was not required to expressly balance the two factors on the record. (People v. Carter (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1114, 1151-1152.)