How do courts review a trial court's ruling on whether an examiner's question calls for a speculative answer under the abuse of discretion standard?

We review a trial court's ruling on whether an examiner's question calls for a speculative answer under an abuse of discretion standard. (People v. Thornton (2007)

Page 5

41 Cal.4th 391, 429.) We will not disturb the ruling except on a showing that the court exceeded the bounds of reason, considering all of the circumstances; in other words, an appellant must convince us that the trial court's ruling was either arbitrary, capricious, or patently absurd. (Saxeny v. Goffney (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 316, 332.)