Evidence is only relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence to the determination of the case more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. KRE 401. See also Kroger Co. v. Willgruber, 920 S.W.2d 61, 67 (Ky. 1996). If the evidence is a “link in the chain” of proof, it is relevant. Turner v. Commonwealth, 914 S.W.2d 343, 346 (Ky. 1996). Further, the decision of whether to admit evidence as more probative than prejudicial is reviewed by appellate courts for an abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. English, 993 S.W.2d 941, 945 (Ky. 1999) (internal citations omitted). The test for abuse of discretion is whether the trial judge's decision was arbitrary, unreasonable, unfair, or unsupported by sound legal principles. 5 Am.Jur.2d Appellate Review § 695 (1995); cf. Kuprion v. Fitzgerald, 888 S.W.2d 679, 684 (Ky. 1994).
1114. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
BRISTOL (CLIFTON GERALD)
VS.
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
OPINION AFFIRMING
LAMBERT (PRESIDING JUDGE)(SENIOR STATUS JUDGE)
TAYLOR (CONCURS) AND HENRY (CONCURS)
2009-CA-001096-MR
TO BE PUBLISHED
HARDIN
