Opinion ID: 1155936
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Dr Graber's Testimony

Text: Appellant contends that it was error to allow the emergency room physician who attended Mrs. Schmunk's death to testify that he would not prescribe narcotic drugs for his own family [b]ecause I don't trust myself making therapeutic decisions about family members, and also it's too hard to get into an abusive matter. Admission of evidence is within the sound discretion of the trial court, and its ruling thereon will not be reversed absent a showing of a clear abuse of discretion. Hopkinson v. State, Wyo., 632 P.2d 79 (1981), cert. denied 455 U.S. 922, 102 S.Ct. 1280, 71 L.Ed.2d 463 (1982); Apodaca v. State, Wyo., 627 P.2d 1023 (1981); Sanville v. State, Wyo., 593 P.2d 1340 (1979). A court does not abuse its discretion unless it acts in a manner which exceeds the bounds of reason under the circumstances. In determining whether there has been an abuse of discretion, the ultimate issue is whether or not the court could reasonably conclude as it did. An abuse of discretion has been said to mean an error of law committed by the court under the circumstances.    Martinez v. State, Wyo., 611 P.2d 831, 838 (1980). Simply stated, appellant has not made any showing of a clear abuse of discretion in this instance. His allegation in this respect is not supported by any authority.