Does the abuse of review standard apply to a ruling by a trial court on the admissibility of evidence?

An appellate court applies the abuse of discretion standard of review to any ruling by a trial court on the admissibility of evidence. (See People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690, 717.) Specifically, "it examines for abuse of discretion a decision on admissibility that turns on the relevance of the evidence in question." (Ibid.) Here, the trustee challenges the trial court's decision not to grant his request for judicial notice of a federal pleading -- a decision made due to the trial court's determination that the document was irrelevant. A trial judge's decision not to take judicial notice "'will be upheld on appeal unless the reviewing court determines that the party furnished information to the judge that was so persuasive that no reasonable judge would have refused to take judicial notice of the matter.' [Citation.]" (Willis v. State of California (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 287, 291.)