Opinion ID: 2316958
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: Mr. Mann raises two issues on appeal, both of which concern evidentiary rulings that the trial justice made. It is well settled that [t]he admissibility of evidence is a question addressed to the sound discretion of the trial justice and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of that discretion. State v. Lynch, 854 A.2d 1022, 1031 (R.I.2004) (quoting State v. Momplaisir, 815 A.2d 65, 72 (R.I. 2003)). In the context of the examination of a witness at trial, [w]e give considerable latitude to a trial justice's rulings. State v. Gomez, 848 A.2d 221, 237 (R.I. 2004). We will not consider such rulings to be reversible error unless we find that the trial justice abused his discretion and thereby prejudiced the complaining parties. State v. Hallenbeck, 878 A.2d 992, 1015 (R.I.2005).