A trial court has broad discretion in determining the relevance and admissibility of evidence. Thus, we generally review evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion. A court abuses its discretion if it acts arbitrarily without the employment of conscientious judgment or exceeds the bounds of reason, resulting in substantial injustice. In exercising its discretion, however, the court is bound by the Rules of Evidence or applicable statutes. Thus, to the extent a trial court's ruling is based on an interpretation of an evidentiary rule or statute, our review is de novo. State v. Passmore, 2010 MT 34, ¶ 51, 355 Mont. 187, 225 P.3d 1229.
The determination of the adequacy of the foundation for the admission of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court, and will not be overturned absent a clear abuse of discretion. State v. Weeks, 270 Mont. 63, 75, 891 P.2d 477, 484 (1995).