United States v. Bennett
363 F.3d 947 (2004)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To prove the contents of an electronic recording, such as data from a Global Positioning System (GPS), the original recording or a duplicate must be produced under the Best Evidence Rule (Fed. R. Evid. 1002); testimony describing the data is inadmissible if the original is not produced or its absence explained.
Facts:
- On January 27, 2000, Coronado Police Officer Keith James observed Vincent Franklin Bennett’s boat traveling north along the California coastline, having first spotted it near the U.S.-Mexico border.
- Officer Sandy Joseph Sena, a member of a joint task force, boarded Bennett's boat at the entrance to San Diego Bay for a compliance check.
- On board, Sena discovered that the boat's registration number did not match Bennett's paperwork and learned there was an outstanding state warrant for Bennett's arrest.
- Sena also observed that the boat was riding unusually low in the water, had a new high-performance engine, and contained unaccounted-for space.
- After Bennett's boat was docked, officers conducted a thorough multi-hour search, which included drilling several holes into the vessel.
- The following day, the boat was transported to a Coast Guard facility and x-rayed, revealing 1,541.5 pounds of marijuana hidden inside.
- During the search, U.S. Customs Officer Malcolm McCloud Chandler found a GPS device and observed its "backtrack" feature, which appeared to graphically display the boat's recent journey from Mexican waters.
Procedural Posture:
- Vincent Franklin Bennett was charged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California with one count of importation of marijuana and one count of possession with intent to distribute.
- Prior to trial, Bennett filed motions to suppress the evidence found on his boat and statements he made to law enforcement.
- The district court held an evidentiary hearing and denied Bennett's suppression motions.
- Following a trial, a jury found Bennett guilty on both counts.
- The district court sentenced Bennett to 121 months of imprisonment for each count, to be served concurrently.
- Bennett (appellant) appealed his conviction and sentence to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, with the U.S. Government as the appellee.
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 law enforcement officer's testimony describing the data displayed on a GPS device, offered to prove the path of a vessel, violate the Best Evidence Rule when the government neither produces the GPS device nor provides a printout of its data?
Opinions:
Majority - Fisher, J.
Yes, an officer's testimony describing data from a GPS device violates the Best Evidence Rule when the data itself is not produced. First, the court affirmed the search of Bennett's boat as a valid border search. Although agents did not see the boat cross the border, its proximity and direction of travel provided a 'reasonable certainty' it had come from foreign waters, making the stop at the functional equivalent of the border. The subsequent extended and destructive search was justified by reasonable suspicion, based on peculiarities like mismatched paperwork, the boat riding low in the water, and an outstanding warrant for Bennett. Therefore, the conviction for drug possession was affirmed. However, the court found the conviction for importation of marijuana was based on improperly admitted evidence. Officer Chandler's testimony about the GPS data violated the Best Evidence Rule (Fed. R. Evid. 1002). The data display on the GPS constituted a 'recording,' and Chandler's testimony was offered to prove its contents—the boat's path from Mexico. Because the government failed to produce the 'original' evidence (the GPS device or a printout of its data) or explain its absence as required by Fed. R. Evid. 1004, the testimony was inadmissible. This error was prejudicial because the other evidence of importation was weak and the jury specifically requested a read-back of the GPS testimony during deliberations, indicating its importance to their verdict. Consequently, the importation conviction was reversed.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the application of the traditional Best Evidence Rule to modern electronic evidence. The court's holding establishes that GPS data and similar electronic compilations are 'recordings' under the Federal Rules of Evidence, meaning testimonial descriptions of their contents are inadmissible if the original data can be produced. This decision pressures the government to properly preserve and present digital evidence in its original or duplicated form, rather than relying on an officer's memory of what a device displayed. It reinforces the foundational requirements for admitting electronic evidence, ensuring that the fact-finder can assess the accuracy and reliability of the data itself, which has significant implications for criminal prosecutions involving digital forensics.
