How have courts reviewed the evidentiary rulings of a trial court?

When reviewing a challenge to a suppression ruling, how does the Court of Appeal review the factual findings of the trial court? (California, United States of America)

Does the "right ruling, wrong reasoning" rule apply to an evidentiary ruling that required the trial court to make findings of fact? (California, United States of America)

Is a trial court's ruling on evidentiary objections based on papers alone reviewed for abuse or reviewed de novo? (California, United States of America)

What is the test for review of a trial court ruling on the admissibility of evidence in limine or during trial? (California, United States of America)

How have courts reviewed a trial court's ruling on the admissibility of evidence? (California, United States of America)

Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)

How does the Court of Appeal review a trial court's ruling to admit evidence over defendant's objection based on evidence section 352? (California, United States of America)

Is a trial court ruling that resolves conflicts in the evidence entitled to greater deference from a reviewing court than a similar finding in a similar case? (California, United States of America)

When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)

When reviewing a ruling on a motion to exclude evidence, how do we review the findings of the trial court? (California, United States of America)