What is the test for exclusion of de minimis evidence in a criminal case?

As we reiterated in People v. Wright, supra, "Section 352 directs 'the trial judge to strike a careful balance between the probative value of the evidence and the danger of prejudice, confusion and undue time consumption. That section requires that the danger of these evils substantially outweigh the probative value of the evidence. This balance is particularly delicate and critical where what is at stake is a criminal defendant's liberty. Nonetheless, it cannot be said that the trial judge's ruling on this evidence, of which the probative value was slight and the chance of prejudice and confusion substantial, struck an improper balance and thereby constituted an abuse of discretion.' [Citation.]" (39 Cal.3d at p. 588, 217 Cal.Rptr. 212, 703 P.2d 1106.) Here the probative value of the proffered evidence was de minimis and the chance of confusion substantial. Exclusion of the evidence was not an abuse of discretion.