The grant or denial of a motion to dismiss for improper venue in a criminal case is a question of law which an appellate court reviews de novo. State v. Galpin, 2003 MT 324, ¶ 22, 318 Mont. 318, 80 P.3d 1207.
We review for abuse of discretion a trial court's ruling on a motion for change of venue under § 46-13-203(1), MCA. 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. Moreover, in exercising its discretion, the court is bound to uphold the defendant's constitutional right to a trial by an impartial jury. The burden to demonstrate an abuse of discretion is on the party seeking reversal of an unfavorable ruling. State v. Devlin, 2009 MT 18, ¶ 15, 349 Mont. 67, 201 P.3d 791.
Upon review of a denial of a motion for change of venue on the basis of prejudicial pretrial publicity, an appellate court looks not to the amount of publicity but rather to whether the publicity is of sufficient inflammatory nature to generate a widespread belief among the community of guilt. This inflammatory nature must be proven by the defendant who alleges denial of a fair trial. State v. Miller, 231 Mont. 497, 505, 757 P.2d 1275, 1280 (1988).