Opinion ID: 2457222
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The envelope and contents

Text: The problem here is that the victim did not identify the envelope and contents at the trial as the one she found in her bedroom after the crimes were committed. We must determine if this physical evidence was properly authenticated and thus admissible. In evidentiary determinations, a trial court has wide discretion. Utley v. State, 308 Ark. 622, 826 S.W.2d 268 (1992). We will not reverse a trial court's ruling concerning the admissibility of evidence unless there is an abuse of discretion. Rule 901(a) of the Arkansas Rules of Evidence provides: The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what the proponent claims. Subsection (b) of the Rule provides, in part, as follows: (b) Illustrations. By way of illustration only, and not by way of limitation, the following are examples of authentication or identification conforming with the requirements of this rule: (1) Testimony of a witness with knowledge. Testimony of a witness with knowledge that a matter is what it is claimed to be.