Authentication Flashcards
FRE 1001
FRE 1001 establishes the definitions for terms used in the Federal Rules of Evidence, including definitions for writings, recordings, and photographs. When answering an Evidence law school exam question related to FRE 1001, it’s important to understand the definitions provided by the rule and how they apply to the fact pattern presented.
Here are some examples of fact patterns that may require analysis under FRE 1001:
Example 1: During a trial, a witness testifies about a recording of a conversation between the witness and the defendant that took place two weeks before the trial. The recording was made on the witness’s phone and saved as an audio file.
To analyze this fact pattern under FRE 1001, you would first need to identify the relevant terms defined by the rule. For example, “writing” is defined as “letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent set down in any form.” “Recording” is defined as “a record that is inscribed on a tangible medium,” and “photograph” is defined as “a still photograph or X-ray, film, videotape, or motion picture.”
In this case, the recording on the witness’s phone would likely be considered a “recording” under FRE 1001, as it is inscribed on a tangible medium. You would need to analyze whether the recording is admissible under the hearsay rule or any relevant exceptions to the hearsay rule, such as the party admission exception under FRE 801(d)(2).
Example 2: During a trial, a party seeks to introduce a written contract into evidence. The contract was signed by both parties and contains terms related to a sale of goods.
To analyze this fact pattern under FRE 1001, you would need to identify the relevant terms defined by the rule. In this case, the written contract would likely be considered a “writing” under FRE 1001, as it contains letters, words, and numbers set down in a tangible form.
You would then need to analyze whether the contract is admissible under the relevant rules of evidence, such as the best evidence rule under FRE 1002, which requires the original or a duplicate to be produced to prove the contents of a writing. If the original or a duplicate is not available, you would need to analyze whether an exception to the best evidence rule applies, such as the secondary evidence rule under FRE 1004.
Example 3: During a trial, a party seeks to introduce a photograph of a car accident into evidence. The photograph was taken by a bystander using their personal cell phone.
To analyze this fact pattern under FRE 1001, you would need to identify the relevant terms defined by the rule. In this case, the photograph would likely be considered a “photograph” under FRE 1001, as it is a still photograph taken using a tangible medium.
You would then need to analyze whether the photograph is admissible under the relevant rules of evidence, such as the authentication rule under FRE 901, which requires evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it to be. In this case, the party seeking to introduce the photograph would need to provide evidence that the photograph accurately depicts the car accident in question and was taken by the bystander using their personal cell phone.
In summary, when answering an Evidence law school exam question related to FRE 1001, it’s important to identify the relevant definitions provided by the rule and analyze how they apply to the fact pattern presented. You may need to analyze the admissibility of writings, recordings, photographs, or other tangible items under the relevant rules of evidence, such as the hearsay rule, the best evidence rule, or the authentication rule.
FRE 901
When answering a question on FRE 901 on an Evidence law school exam, there are several things to look out for, including the elements required for authentication and the different types of evidence that can be authenticated.
FRE 901 deals with the requirement of authentication or identification of evidence before it can be admitted at trial. Authentication refers to the process of establishing that evidence is what it purports to be, while identification refers to the process of showing that evidence is relevant to the case.
The first step in analyzing a question on FRE 901 is to determine the type of evidence being offered. This will help you to identify the appropriate method of authentication. The different types of evidence that can be authenticated include:
Documentary Evidence: This includes any kind of written or recorded evidence such as contracts, letters, emails, videos, and photographs.
Testimonial Evidence: This includes any evidence given by a witness on the stand, such as oral testimony or written statements.
Real Evidence: This includes any physical object that is relevant to the case, such as weapons, clothing, and fingerprints.
Once you have identified the type of evidence, you can then look at the specific requirements for authentication under FRE 901. Generally, the proponent of the evidence must provide evidence that is sufficient to support a finding that the evidence is what it purports to be.
FRE 901(b) provides examples of the ways in which evidence can be authenticated, including:
Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge: This involves a witness testifying that the evidence is what it purports to be based on their personal knowledge.
Non-Expert Opinion About Handwriting: This involves a non-expert witness testifying about the authenticity of a document based on their familiarity with the handwriting.
Comparison by Expert Witness: This involves an expert witness comparing the questioned evidence with known authentic examples to determine whether they match.
Distinctive Characteristics and the Like: This involves the proponent of the evidence pointing out distinctive features that suggest authenticity, such as a watermark or letterhead.
Chain of Custody: This involves establishing a chain of custody for the evidence to show that it has not been tampered with or altered since its creation.
For example, let’s say that the prosecution wants to offer a photograph taken at the crime scene as evidence in a murder trial. The defense objects, arguing that the prosecution has not properly authenticated the photograph.
To address this issue, the prosecution could call a witness who was present at the crime scene and can testify that the photograph accurately reflects what was observed. Alternatively, the prosecution could call a forensic expert who can testify that the photograph is authentic based on their analysis of the image.
In another example, let’s say that the defense wants to offer a contract as evidence in a breach of contract case. The opposing party objects, arguing that the contract is a forgery.
To authenticate the contract, the defense could call a witness who was present when the contract was signed and can testify to its authenticity. Alternatively, the defense could call a handwriting expert to testify about the authenticity of the signatures on the contract.
In both examples, the proponent of the evidence must provide sufficient evidence to establish its authenticity before it can be admitted at trial. By understanding the requirements of FRE 901 and the different methods of authentication, you can effectively analyze questions related to the authentication of evidence on an Evidence law school exam.
