Email Authentication via Admission
Anderson v. United States, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166799 (N.D. Ga. Dec. 2, 2014):
6. Failure to Challenge Authenticity and Completeness of E-Mails
Finally, Petitioner contends that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the authenticity and completeness of the printouts of e-mail exchanges between the undercover agent and Petitioner or his partner. (Suppl.; Br. Supp. § 2255 Mot. at 32-33.) [*13] Judge Johnson correctly rejected this argument, noting:
During trial, [Petitioner] testified regarding the authenticity and completeness of the emails. [Petitioner] acknowledged that he sent the email initiating communications with the undercover agent, that his email address was firstname.lastname@example.org, and that he wrote all of the emails from that address that were admitted into evidence. (Trial Tr. Vol. II  at 21, 28.) [Petitioner] also testified that the emails introduced into evidence between himself and the undercover agent were the "complete list" of emails between himself and the agent and that there were "no missing emails." (Id. at 29.) Because [Petitioner] authenticated the emails and testified that they were complete, he cannot show deficient performance or prejudice based on counsel's failure to object based on authenticity and completeness.
(Final Report & Recommendation at 11-12.) Petitioner therefore is not entitled to relief based on this argument. Further, with all due respect to Petitioner, nothing in his Objections warrants a different conclusion, including Petitioner's contention that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing to address this claim. (Objections at 14-15.) The Court therefore adopts [*14] this portion of the Final Report and Recommendation, and overrules Petitioner's corresponding Objections.
Share this article: