to impeach or rebut the defendant’s testimony. § 16-8-107(1), 8A C.R.S. (1992 Supp.). In its analysis, the majority also discussed section 16-8-106, 8A C.R.S. (1986 & 1992 Supp.). Section 16-8-106(2) provides: (2) The defendant shall have a privilege against self-incrimination during the course of an examination under this section. The fact of the defendant’s noncooperation with psychiatrists and other personnel conducting the examination may be admissible in the defendant’s trial on the issues of insanity, competency, or impaired mental condition. § 16-8-106(2), 8A C.R.S. (1986). 7 . Similarly, under the Federal Rules of Evidence, a specific objection is waived on appeal if not raised at trial. Fed.R.Evid. 103; see, e.g., United States v. Gomez-Norena, 908 F.2d 497, 499-500 (9th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 363, 112
holding that a party fails to preserve an evidentiary issue for appeal not only by failing to make a specific objection but also by making the wrong specific objection holding party must make timely and specific objection at trial to preserve issue for appellate review holding that to preserve an alleged error in the admission of evidence a timely objection must be made to the introduction of the evidence specific grounds for the objection should be stated and a ruling on the objection must be made by the trial court holding that in order to preserve an issue for review a party must make a timely and specific objection at trial holding timely and sufficiently specific objection is required to preserve error