Generally, "all relevant evidence is admissible." (Evid. Code, 351.) A felony conviction involving moral turpitude may suggest a willingness to lie and thus is probative to impeach a witness. (See People v. Wheeler (1992) 4 Cal.4th 284, 295-296 (Wheeler); People v. Castro (1985) 38 Cal.3d 301, 314-315 (Castro).) Section 28, subdivision (f) of article I of the California Constitution provides: "Any prior felony conviction . . . shall . . . be used without limitation for purposes of impeachment . . . ." In Castro, supra, 38 Cal.3d 301, our Supreme Court held that trial courts retain their discretion under Evidence Code section 352 to bar impeachment with felony convictions that necessarily involve moral turpitude when their probative value is substantially outweighed by their prejudicial effect. (People v. Collins (1986) 42 Cal.3d 378, 381.) A trial court may exclude evidence under Evidence Code section 352 if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a substantial danger of undue prejudice or confusion of issues. "When determining whether to admit a prior conviction for impeachment purposes, the court should consider, among other factors, whether it reflects on the witness's honesty or veracity, whether it is near or remote in time, whether it is for the same or similar conduct as the charged offense, and what effect its admission would have on the defendant's decision to testify. ." (People v. Clark (2011) 52 Cal.4th 856, 931.)