A trial court decision to take judicial notice of a fact is reviewed for abuse of discretion. State v. Elison, 2000 MT 288, ¶¶ 36–38, 302 Mont. 228, 14 P.3d 456. See also State v. Anderson, 211 Mont. 272, 287–88, 686 P.2d 193, 201–02 (Mont. 1984).
A defendant must request review by the trial court, either before or after the judicial notice is taken. State v. Peterson, 2002 MT 65, ¶ 21, 309 Mont. 199, 44 P.3d 499 (interpreting provisions of the Montana Code Annotated which have been renumbered but preserved in substance in M.R. Evid. 201 and M.R. Evid. 202). Failure to make objection at the trial court level will preclude review on appeal. Peterson, ¶ 21.
When a district court takes judicial notice of testimony and a defendant objects to that notice, the decision to take judicial notice of testimony is subject to harmless error review if "the State presented sufficient evidence at trial on which the finder of fact could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that [the defendant] was guilty of the offenses charged." State v. Loh, 275 Mont. 460, 748–79, 914 P.2d 592, 603 (Mont. 1996).