Appellant pleaded no contest to possession of marijuana for sale following the denial of his motion to traverse a search warrant and suppress evidence. The search warrant was issued based upon statements by the affiant, a police officer, who claimed that he had found marijuana cuttings in appellant’s trash, as well as other statements which appellant challenged in the traversal hearings as false. Appellant testified that he never put his cuttings in the trash, and called numerous witnesses who testified that the officer had a pattern and practice of including similar misrepresentations in other search warrant affidavits, as well as a representative of SMUD who testified that the power usage records the officer said he received were no longer in SMUD’s possession. However the court excluded other evidence which appellant contended was relevant to the officer’s credibility. The appellate court affirmed the denial of the motion, finding that the additional evidence was properly excluded on relevance grounds, and on the basis of Evidence Code section 352, that the evidence was cumulative and/or unduly time consuming. Further, the appellate court found that the warrant was supported by probable cause.