Volume 58 — Washington Reports, Second Series

[1] EVIDENCE — DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE — PHOTOGRAPHS — ADMISSION AND IDENTIFICATION — DISCRETION OF COURT. The admission or rejection of photographs as evidence lies within the sound discretion of the trial court; and such discretion extends to the sufficiency of the identification. [2] SAME — AUTHENTICATION — WHAT CONSTITUTES. Sufficient authentication of a photograph to permit it to be admitted into evidence is established when some witness, not necessarily the photographer, gives some indication as to when, where, and under what circumstances the photograph was taken, and that the photograph accurately portrays the subject or subjects illustrated; and the photograph need only be sufficiently accurate to be helpful to the court and the jury. [3] SAME. In a prosecution for first-degree forgery, held that there was sufficient authentication to warrant the admission of a photograph taken by a "Regiscope" machine, which simultaneously photographs, whenever a check is inserted into it, both the check and the person facing the machine, where a witness testified to her use of the machine and identified the background of the photograph, and a second witness testified at length concerning the "Regiscope" process. [4] SAME — OPINION EVIDENCE — QUALIFICATION OF WITNESS — DISCRETION OF COURT. Whether or not a witness is qualified to express an expert opinion lies within the sound discretion of the trial court. [5] SAME. In such a prosecution, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting a witness to express an opinion as to the possibility of altering a "Regiscope" print, where although the witness was not a professional photographer, he had testified that he had personally developed four to five hundred thousand individual "Regiscope" films. [2] See Ann. 55 A.L.R. 1344, 9 A.L.R. 2d 899; Am. Jur., Evidence, § 730.