Tag:Admissibility

Key Insight: Trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence obtained from Yahoo! linking defendant to the relevant account and screen name where Yahoo! stated it did not verify the personal information provided by its users and thus ?the source of the information or the method or circumstances of preparation?indicate[d] a lack of trustworthiness? such that admission under the business records exception was error

Key Insight: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting reproductions of images found on appellant?s computer at trial where the Commonwealth presented testimony from the forensic scientist and investigator responsible for making the reproductions explaining the process of reproducing the images and confirming that the reproductions accurately represented the images on defendant?s hard drive, and where defendant admitted membership in relevant websites and storing child pornography on his computer; in Virginia, the best evidence rule is limited to writings and was not applicable in this case

Nature of Case: Possession of child pornography

Electronic Data Involved: Reproductions of images on defendant’s hard drive

Key Insight: Appellate court held audio tapes were properly authenticated and admitted into evidence and that trial court did not abuse its discretion upon finding that ?the State presented ample evidence to support the conclusion that the two recordings accurately depicted the two conversations they purported to reproduce? including testimony from victim?s mother who actually taped the conversations and the State Trooper who provided the equipment and instructions; court declined to adopt nine part traditional test for authentication and noted the ?modern approach,? i.e., ?[whether[ the proponent [of the evidence has] presented sufficient evidence to support a rational finding [that] the tape recording is authentic?

Nature of Case: Second degree sexual abuse of a minor

Electronic Data Involved: Audio tapes

Key Insight: Where, based on chain of custody testimony, the trial court admitted a videotape discovered by defendant?s roommate and given to the police, but where there was no testimony concerning the making of the videotape or where it was kept or who had access to it during the nearly three year period from the time of its making to its discovery, and where the appellate court acknowledged that ?because films are so easily altered, there is a very real danger that deceptive tapes, inadequately authenticated, could contaminate the trial process,? appellate court found admission of the tape was in error and that the error was not harmless and ordered a new trial

Nature of Case: Sex abuse

Electronic Data Involved: Videotape

Key Insight: Court found edited copy of surveillance tape was properly authenticated and admitted where, pursuant to the N.J. Best Evidence Rule, duplicates are admissible to the same extent as the original unless a question is raised as to the authenticity of the original, which defendant did not do, and where the testimony of the patrolman who viewed the original surveillance tape established that the copy was an accurate duplication of the pertinent parts of the original tape, and where there was no showing of unfairness in the production of the edited tape rather than the original

Nature of Case: Criminal / Robbery

Electronic Data Involved: Copy of surveillance tape

Key Insight: Emails were properly authenticated by defendant?s acknowledgment that he sent the emails at issue during a recorded interview with detectives, by the victim?s testimony that she was familiar with defendant?s email address and signature and by defendant?s own offering of emails between himself and the victim which contained identical email addresses to those emails challenged on appeal

Nature of Case: Criminal

Electronic Data Involved: Emails

Key Insight: Where plaintiff offered printouts of defamatory statements from website for the limited purpose of proving the statements appeared on the worldwide web on the days that plaintiff personally saw the statements and printed them from the computer, testimony of plaintiff of his personal knowledge of the content was sufficient to authenticate the documents

Nature of Case: Defamation

Electronic Data Involved: Printout of website

Key Insight: Court found ?computer-generated? exhibits summarizing loss adjustment expense payments ?fit squarely within the business records exception to hearsay? and were properly authenticated by the testimony of an employee who, although not responsible for actually inputting each piece of data that was summarized in the exhibit, was sufficiently familiar with the record system that his ?description of the process used to create the summaries was sufficient to authenticate the evidence?

Nature of Case: Breach of insurance contract

Electronic Data Involved: Computer-generated summaries

Key Insight: Court of Appeals reversed Special Court of Appeals and remanded case for new trial based on State?s failure to properly authenticate surveillance video where State entered video into evidence but provided no testimony as to ?the process used, the manner of the operation of the cameras, the reliability of authenticity of its images, or the chain of custody of the pictures?

Nature of Case: First degree assault and related offenses

Electronic Data Involved: Video Surveillance