What is the test for admitting evidence of domestic violence against a police officer?

Defendant also maintains that even if the evidence was relevant it should have been rejected under Evidence Code section 352. He again relies on his argument that there was little probative value in the domestic violence evidence as applied to crimes concerning the police officers. He contends that evidence of domestic violence is "uniquely prejudicial," painting him as a "wife batterer" and "an immoral person unworthy of the jury's belief or consideration." (People v. Sam (1969) 71 Cal.2d 194, 206.) He also maintains the evidence "effectively deprived" him of his defense that he intended only to commit suicide because it suggested his testimony was not credible.

As defendant notes evidence should be excluded under Evidence Code section 352 only where its prejudicial effect outweighs its probative value. "`Evidence is substantially more prejudicial than probative [citation] if . . . it poses an intolerable "risk to the fairness of the proceedings or the reliability of the outcome" [citation].' [Citation.]" (People v. Lindberg (2008) 45 Cal.4th 1, 49.) We review the admission of evidence under Evidence Code section 352 for abuse of discretion.