Opinion ID: 3037461
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Birth record

Text: [1] The record of Pintado-Isiordia’s birth, which was issued by the government of Nayarit, Mexico, is self-authenticating under Fed. R. Civ. P. 44(a)(2).1 The Government was not 1 Rule 27 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure makes Fed. R. Civ. P. 44 applicable in criminal proceedings. UNITED STATES v. PINTADO-ISIORDIA 5849 required to submit a “final certification” under that Rule because the birth record and its attestation were certified by an Apostille in accordance with the Hague Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents,2 to which both Mexico and the United States are parties. Pintado-Isiordia argues that the district court erred by finding “good cause” for admitting the birth record, but that is a separate exception to the “final certification” requirement. [2] We do not agree, however, with the district court’s conclusion that the Government proved that this particular birth record fell within the public records exception to the hearsay rule. The portion of the document that purports to set forth the legal authority for maintaining the record is shown as “illegible” in the translated copy submitted to the district court. Thus, we cannot tell if the document was a record of matters “observed pursuant to duty imposed by law.” Fed. R. Evid. 803(8). [3] Nevertheless, any error was harmless. Pintado-Isiordia’s mother testified that her husband had Pintado-Isiordia’s birth registered in Nayarit, and thus, the birth certificate merely corroborates his own witness’s first-hand account of what transpired after his birth in December 1951. In that regard, the birth certificate was hardly prejudicial to Pintado-Isiordia’s defense. For that same reason, even if we assume that the birth certificate was “testimonial” under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), and thus its admission violated Pintado-Isiordia’s Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him, he was not denied a fair trial. 2 527 U.N.T.S. 189, T.I.A.S. 10072; see Fed. R. Civ. P. 44(a)(2) (“The final certification is unnecessary if the record and the attestation are certified as provided in a treaty or convention to which the United States and the foreign country in which the official record is located are parties.”). 5850 UNITED STATES v. PINTADO-ISIORDIA