Opinion ID: 721171
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Computer Generated Certificates of Assessments

Text: 18 Thomas contends the district court erred in admitting four computer generated certificates of assessments and payments, because the certificates were not properly authenticated. We disagree. 19 Computer-generated records may be admissible as public records under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8). Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d 531, 539-540 (9th Cir.1992). To lay a proper foundation, the government must make a prima facie showing of authenticity. United States v. Black, 767 F.2d 1334, 1342 (9th Cir.1985). We require strict compliance with the authenticity rules when making such a showing. United States v. Perlmuter, 693 F.2d 1290, 1292 (9th Cir.1982). 20 The certificates of assessments were introduced during the testimony of Kay Jones, who had been the custodian at the IRS's Fresno service center for eighteen years. The district court admitted the certificates as self-authenticating domestic public records under seal. Fed.R.Evid. 902(1). The certificates, however, were not signed under seal. Thus, the certificates were not admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 902(1). 21 However, a witness with knowledge may authenticate evidence by testifying that the matter is what it is claimed to be. Fed.R.Evid. 901(b)(1). Jones was a witness with knowledge because she understood the service center's record-keeping system. United States v. Arias-Villanueva, 998 F.2d 1491, 1503 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 359 (1993). Her testimony provided the necessary authentication under Rule 901(b)(1). 22 AFFIRMED.