With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". not allowing her to question Mr. Bressi on re-cross examination. Appellant argues that there was no opportunity given to her for re-cross. After the Commonwealth questioned Mr. Bressi on redirect examination, this court excused the witness. Appellant did not object. Therefore, this issue is waived on appeal. Pa.R.A.P. 302(a). XII. Mary Dunne Properly Referenced the Forensic Report. Appellant claims that this court erred in allowing the witness, Mary Dunne to reference the forensic report, which was not properly introduced. Again this issue is waived based on appellant’s failure to object at trial. Pa.R.A.P. 302(a) (stating: “Issues not raised in the [trial] court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal”); Commonwealth v. Schoff 911 A.2d 147, 157 (Pa. Super. 2006) (<HOLDING>). XIII. Testimony Regarding a Severance Package

A: holding timely and sufficiently specific objection is required to preserve error
B: holding party must make timely and specific objection at trial to preserve issue for appellate review
C: holding a general ruling by the trial court is insufficient to preserve a specific issue for appellate review
D: recognizing that the specific argument regarding an issue must be made in the trial court to preserve that issue for appellate review
B.