Opinion ID: 2264062
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 16

Heading: Transcript of Defendant's Police Statement

Text: The defendant next contends that the transcript of defendant's statement to police was not properly authenticated because, according to him, the transcript was inaccurate. Because the audio tape of defendant's statement to police would be played for the jury, both parties agreed that the transcript of that tape would be provided to the jury to assist the jury in following the tape. The defendant, however, objected to the state's motion to admit the transcript into evidence. Before evidence is admitted, it must be authenticated with other evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims. R.I. R. Evid. 901(a). [A]dmission of transcripts into evidence is within the sound discretion of the trial justice. State v. Ahmadjian, 438 A.2d 1070, 1082 (R.I.1981). The trial justice may conduct a hearing before or during trial in which he [or she] reviews the tapes and transcripts. If convinced of their accuracy, he [or she] may then admit the transcripts   . Id. In light of defendant's general objection, the trial justice endeavored to satisfy herself that the transcript was, in fact, an accurate written record of the content of the audiotape by carefully reading the transcript while the audiotape was played for the jury. Afterward, she found the transcript to be accurate. The defendant's general assertion to the contrary in his brief, without documenting a single inaccuracy in the transcript, is completely unavailing. Thus, the trial justice did not commit reversible error when she admitted the transcript into evidence. [5] D