State v. Brown
818 S.E.2d 735, 424 S.C. 479 (2018)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To authenticate evidence generated by a process or system under Rule 901(b)(9), such as GPS records, the proponent must present evidence describing the process or system and showing that it produces an accurate result. Testimony that such evidence is accurate merely because it is frequently used in court is insufficient to meet this standard.
Facts:
- Around midnight on December 24, 2011, two masked men, armed with a gun and a knife, robbed a Zaxby's restaurant in Goose Creek, South Carolina, and shot an assistant manager.
- The investigation led police to Christopher Wilson, who was discovered to have been wearing a GPS ankle monitor at the time of the robbery.
- A police K-9 unit followed a scent trail from near the Zaxby's to Wilson's residence, and a ski mask found along the trail contained Wilson's DNA.
- Cynthia Garrett, Petitioner's girlfriend, informed police that Petitioner had confessed to her that he and Wilson committed the robbery.
- Marteeka Hamilton testified that on the night of the robbery, she picked up Petitioner and Wilson near Wilson's home and overheard Wilson say he had accidentally shot someone.
- Police executed a search warrant at Wilson's residence and found Petitioner alone inside.
- During the search, police discovered the gun used in the robbery, which contained a DNA mixture from which neither Petitioner nor Wilson could be excluded, a knife matching the one used, and a victim's social security card.
- While incarcerated awaiting trial, Petitioner confessed to his cellmate, Lanier Daniels, that he had planned and committed the Zaxby's robbery with Wilson.
Procedural Posture:
- Petitioner was charged with robbery and other crimes and was tried in a South Carolina trial court.
- At trial, the State sought to introduce GPS records from an ankle monitor worn by Petitioner's accomplice, Christopher Wilson.
- Petitioner objected to the admission of the GPS records, arguing the State failed to properly authenticate them.
- The trial court overruled the objection and admitted the records into evidence.
- A jury found Petitioner guilty of armed robbery, kidnapping, and other related charges.
- Petitioner, as the appellant, appealed his conviction to the South Carolina Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, and in any event, any error was harmless.
- Petitioner then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, which the South Carolina Supreme Court granted.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a witness's testimony that GPS data is accurate because '[w]e use it in court all the time' satisfy the authentication requirement under Rule 901(b)(9) of the South Carolina Rules of Evidence?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Kittredge
No, a witness's testimony that GPS data is accurate simply because it is used in court all the time does not satisfy the authentication requirement under Rule 901(b)(9). To properly authenticate evidence generated by a system like GPS tracking, the proponent must present testimony describing the system's process and showing that it produces an accurate result. Here, the State's witness, Agent Powell, testified that the GPS records were accurate because '[w]e use it in court all the time.' This circular reasoning provides no actual evidence of the system's reliability. While the general acceptance of GPS technology is not in dispute, the State must still make a minimal showing that the specific records in question are accurate. Because the State failed to do so, the trial court erred in admitting the GPS records. However, the court found this error to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to the overwhelming independent evidence of Petitioner's guilt, including multiple confessions and DNA evidence linking him to the crime scene and weapon.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the foundational requirements for admitting machine-generated evidence, like GPS data, in South Carolina. It clarifies that a proponent cannot rely on the evidence's past admissibility or general technological reliability to bypass the specific authentication requirements of Rule 901(b)(9). The ruling establishes a clear, yet not overly burdensome, standard for prosecutors, requiring testimony from a knowledgeable witness about the system's process and accuracy. While the court's harmless error finding prevented a reversal in this specific case, the established precedent will govern future cases, forcing litigants to lay a more thorough foundation for technologically-derived evidence and strengthening evidentiary standards in the digital age.
