Smith v. StateSmith v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Per Curiam
OPINION
Per Curiam:
On February 25, 1970 Smith was convicted by a jury of the crime of Possession of a Cheating Device.
Over objection, the security officer was allowed to demonstrate at the trial how the cheating device worked. Smith now contends the trial judge erred by allowing the demonstration without a proper foundation. The security officer testified that the actual slot machine Smith used and the demonstrator were both Bally machines with standard acceptors. He testified both machines were substantially similar. Admissibility of evidence depends upon a foundational showing of substantial similarity between the tests conducted and actual conditions. Ramseyer v. General Motors Corporation, 417 F.2d 859 (8th Cir. 1969). The decision whether to allow a demonstration rests largely in the discretion of the trial judge and his decision will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear showing of an abuse of discretion.
Affirmed.