United States v. Smith
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 11078, 79 Fed. R. Serv. 916, 566 F.3d 410 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Federal Rule of Evidence 1002, the 'best evidence rule,' requires the production of an original document only when a party seeks to prove the contents of that document, not when a witness testifies to a fact that exists independently of the document, even if the witness learned that fact from the document.
Facts:
- During a search of Cordell Smith's apartment in Charlotte, North Carolina, police recovered drugs, cash, and drug paraphernalia.
- Police also seized four firearms: two loaded handguns and two shotguns.
- To prove an element of the felon-in-possession charge, the government needed to show the firearms had traveled in interstate commerce.
- Special Agent Andrew Cheramie of the ATF physically examined the firearms to identify their manufacturers and serial numbers.
- Agent Cheramie then consulted published reference books and a proprietary ATF computerized database to determine where each firearm was manufactured.
- Based on his research, Agent Cheramie concluded that all four firearms were manufactured in states other than North Carolina (specifically, Montana, Arizona, and Connecticut).
Procedural Posture:
- Cordell Smith was indicted in federal district court on drug trafficking and firearms offenses, including being a felon in possession of a firearm.
- At trial, the government presented the testimony of Special Agent Cheramie to establish the interstate commerce element of the felon-in-possession charge.
- Smith's counsel objected to the testimony, arguing it violated the best evidence rule (FRE 1002) because the agent was testifying about information he read in documents not in evidence.
- The district court overruled the objection and admitted the testimony.
- The jury returned a verdict convicting Smith on all counts.
- The district court sentenced Smith to 197 months' imprisonment.
- Smith appealed his conviction and sentence to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
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 an expert witness's testimony about a firearm's place of manufacture, which the witness learned by consulting written materials and databases, violate the 'best evidence rule' of Federal Rule of Evidence 1002 when the underlying written materials are not entered into evidence?
Opinions:
Majority - Niemeyer, Circuit Judge
No, the expert witness's testimony did not violate the 'best evidence rule.' Federal Rule of Evidence 1002 applies only when a party is seeking to prove the content of a writing itself, not when offering testimony about a fact that exists independently of that writing. Here, the government sought to prove the fact of where the firearms were manufactured, not the content of the books or databases Agent Cheramie consulted. The place of manufacture is a fact that exists in the world, and a witness can testify to that fact even if they learned it by reading. The rule is more accurately described as the 'original document rule' and does not require the 'best evidence' of a fact in all circumstances, but rather the original document when its contents are the subject of proof.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the narrow application of the 'best evidence rule,' clarifying that it is not a broad mandate for the most probative evidence but a specific rule governing proof of a document's contents. It protects the ability of expert witnesses to rely on a wide body of literature, data, and other materials in forming their opinions without the impractical burden of introducing every source into evidence. This holding solidifies the distinction between testifying about the contents of a writing and testifying to an independent fact learned from a writing, which is crucial for the efficient presentation of expert testimony in federal court.
