State v. Noorzai

“[W]henever a piece of evidence is offered there must be certain minimum assurances that the evidence is what it purports to be, what it is offered as being [,] and what its value depends on.” Legislative Commentary to OEC 901, reprinted in Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Oregon Evidence 901.02, at 947 (6th ed 2013).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction of fourth-degree assault constituting domestic violence. Defendant assigned error to the court’s pretrial ruling that a recorded 9-1-1 call would be admitted at trial. On appeal, Defendant argued that the court erred in admitting the 9-1-1 recording because the State failed to lay an adequate foundation to establish the recording’s authenticity under OEC 901. In response, the State argued that the certificate of authenticity was sufficient to satisfy OEC 901, and that, if it was not, the surrounding circumstances and the content of the recording itself were sufficient to authenticate the call. “[W]henever a piece of evidence is offered there must be certain minimum assurances that the evidence is what it purports to be, what it is offered as being [,] and what its value depends on.” Legislative Commentary to OEC 901, reprinted in Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Oregon Evidence 901.02, at 947 (6th ed 2013). The Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred because none of the traditional indicia of accuracy were present, and the State had not shown any other evidence that supported a finding that the recording was accurate. Conviction for fourth-degree assault constituting domestic violence reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed.