What is the test for admissibility of evidence of an uncharged sexual assault?

Even where such evidence is relevant for other purposes ... evidence of other crimes contains within itself a substantial degree of prejudice [and] should be received with extreme caution, its admissibility examined with care, and in the event of uncertainty as to its connection with the offense charged the doubt should be resolved in favor of the accused. (People v. Holt (1984) 37 Cal.3d 436, 451, 208 Cal.Rptr. 547, 690 P.2d 1207.) The probative value of the uncharged offense evidence must be substantial and

[238 Cal.App.4th 505]

must not be largely outweighed by the probability that its admission would create a serious danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. (People v. Kipp (1998) 18 Cal.4th 349, 371, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 716, 956 P.2d 1169.)