United States v. Charles Frederick Gerhart
1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 7754, 538 F.2d 807 (1976)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Federal Rule of Evidence 1004, when an original document is lost, any secondary evidence of its contents is admissible without a preliminary showing of its trustworthiness by clear and convincing evidence; questions of the secondary evidence's credibility are for the trier of fact to weigh, not for the court to decide as a matter of admissibility.
Facts:
- Charles Frederick Gerhart terminated a subcontracting agreement with Maplenoll Construction Company and accepted a final settlement of $45,079.86.
- The settlement was paid via two checks: one for $40,247.46 and another (check No. 106) for $4,822.40.
- Gerhart later applied for a loan from the First National Bank of Colfax, fraudulently listing a $50,000 account receivable.
- To support his application, Gerhart presented the bank with photocopies of the two settlement checks, but the photocopy of check No. 106 was altered to appear as though it was for $54,822.40.
- A bank officer, Charles Stinson, became suspicious and gave the photocopies provided by Gerhart to a state law enforcement agency.
- Before surrendering the documents, Stinson made a second set of photocopies for the bank's records.
- The state law enforcement agency subsequently lost the original photocopies that Gerhart had provided to the bank.
Procedural Posture:
- Charles Frederick Gerhart was charged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa with making a material false statement on a loan application.
- At his jury trial, the Government offered into evidence a photocopy of a photocopy of an altered check.
- Gerhart objected to the admission of the evidence, arguing it violated the best-evidence rule and lacked trustworthiness.
- The trial court overruled the objection and admitted the exhibit into evidence.
- The jury returned a verdict of guilty.
- Gerhart (appellant) appealed his conviction to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, with the United States 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 Federal Rule of Evidence 1004 require a proponent to make a clear and convincing showing of trustworthiness before secondary evidence of a lost original's contents may be admitted?
Opinions:
Majority - Chief Judge Gibson
No. Federal Rule of Evidence 1004 does not require a clear and convincing showing of trustworthiness as a precondition for admitting secondary evidence of a lost writing's contents. The rule simply requires that the original be lost or destroyed, not in bad faith by the proponent. Once this condition is met, any form of secondary evidence is admissible to prove the contents of the original. The opponent's challenges to the accuracy or credibility of the secondary evidence go to its weight, which is a matter for the trier of fact to determine, not to its admissibility, which is a preliminary question for the court. The court’s role is limited to determining if the original is lost and if a sufficient foundation exists for a reasonable juror to be convinced the secondary evidence correctly reflects the original's contents.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the standard for admitting secondary evidence under the then-new Federal Rules of Evidence, specifically rejecting a heightened 'clear and convincing' standard of trustworthiness. By establishing a lower threshold for admissibility, the court shifts the focus from judicial gatekeeping to the jury's role in weighing evidence. This interpretation simplifies the admission of copies when originals are lost and reinforces the principle that questions of credibility and accuracy are for the trier of fact. The ruling makes it easier for parties to prove the contents of lost documents, as long as they can provide a foundational basis for the secondary evidence's authenticity.
