Opinion ID: 884167
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Did the District Court err in admitting Appellant's blood test results?

Text: During the trial of 95-203, Appellant objected on several grounds to the admission of his blood test results. On appeal, Appellant set forth the portion of the transcript containing his objections and then summarily argued that admission of the blood test results was improper and requires reversal. Appellant set forth no citation to authority or legal analysis to support his argument. An appellant carries the burden of establishing error by the trial court. Rule 23, M.R.App.P., requires an appellant to cite to authority for the position being advanced on appeal. In this case, because Appellant failed in this regard, he cannot establish any error. State v. Fina (1995), 273 Mont. 171, 181, 902 P.2d 30, 38. We conclude that the District Court did not err in admitting into evidence Appellant's blood test results.