What is the test for excluding pornographic movie testimony as a sanction for the defense not providing timely discovery?

Defendant contends the trial court erred by excluding the pornographic movie testimony as a sanction for the defense not providing timely discovery. We have concluded ante, that the trial court properly excluded the evidence pursuant to Evidence Code section 352, which was the trial court's initial reason for excluding the evidence. Because the trial court did not err in excluding the evidence pursuant to Evidence Code section 352, we do not review the trial court's secondary reason related to discovery rules. (See People v. Travis, supra, 139 Cal.App.4th at p. 1280 [issue is moot when no effective relief can be granted].)

d) Constitutional Rights