In what circumstances will the court interrupt appellant's testimony and confer with counsel outside the presence of the jury?

In accordance with its duty to control the proceedings, when it became apparent appellant was going to provide inadmissible evidence, the court interrupted appellant's testimony and conferred with counsel outside the presence of the jury. ( 1044 ["It shall be the duty of the judge to control all proceedings during the trial, and to limit the introduction of evidence and the argument of counsel to relevant and material matters, with a view to the expeditious and effective ascertainment of the truth regarding the matters involved."]; People v. Sturm, supra, 37 Cal.4th at p. 1237 ["The trial court has a statutory duty to control trial proceedings, including the introduction and exclusion of evidence."])