Opinion ID: 1949597
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: clark's photograph

Text: [¶17] We next consider the trial court's evidentiary ruling excluding the photograph of Clark, reviewing the court's decision only for abuse of discretion. State v. Francis, 539 A.2d 213, 215 (Me. 1988); see also State v. Moontri, 649 A.2d 315, 317 (Me.1994) (stating that it is settled law in this jurisdiction that the admissibility of photographs is left largely to the discretion of the presiding Justice (quotation marks omitted)). Having viewed the photograph, and given Clark's opportunity to testify extensively at trial as to what happened during the arrest depicted in the photograph and how that incident added to his distrust of the Portland Police Department, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in ruling the photograph inadmissible pursuant to M.R. Evid. 403.