Texts and Phone Call Met Low Burden Needed for Authentication

US v. Davis: Davis was on trial distributing more than 50 grams of methamphetamine. Part of the evidence involved a controlled purchase of methamphetamine from Davis by a confidential informant. Davis was convicted and sentenced to 260 months in prison.

On appeal, Davis raised several evidentiary challenges to his conviction, all related to the controlled buy with the CI. First, Davis argued that the district court erred by allowing a police officer to explain that he recruited the CI because she had previously purchased drugs from Davis. Applying plain error review, and noting that Davis was not challenge similar testimony from another witness, the court concluded that there was no error because the testimony was for “explaining why they solicited” the CI, thus it was not offered for the truth of whether the CI had bought from Davis in the past. Second, Davis contended that the district court erred by concluding that photos of text messages between the CI and people labeled “Joseph Davis” and “Joseph Other” had been properly authenticated. Noting the low hurdle that authentication poses, the court found no error because the “record contains ample contextual evidence to create a prima facie showing that” the CI was texting with Davis, mainly because it was Davis who showed up to complete the sale that the CI was negotiating in the texts. Finally, the court rejected the argument that a phone call between the CI and Davis was not properly authenticated, because the officer who was working with the CI knew Davis’ voice and could identify him.