A trial court erred in overruling the defendant’s objection to the introduction of gang evidence, but the error did not amount to a violation of due process. The court here considered the question of when, if ever, a trial objection on Evidence Code section 352 grounds preserves the appellate argument that admitting the evidence violated a defendant’s due process rights. The court concluded that the trial objection must fairly state the specific grounds upon which the defendant believes the evidence should be excluded. A defendant may not argue on appeal that the court should have excluded the evidence for a reason not asserted below, but the defendant may argue that the overruling of the objection on the grounds stated below amounted to a violation of due process. The court further found that where the grounds asserted for excluding evidence are that the evidence is more prejudicial than probative, such an error only amounts to a due process violation if it results in a trial proceeding that is fundamentally unfair.