Opinion ID: 767255
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: chat room logs

Text: 9 We review a district court's finding that evidence is supported by a proper foundation for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Santiago, 46 F.3d 885, 888 (9th Cir. 1995). The foundational requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims. Fed. R. Evid. 901(a); see also United States v. Harrington, 923 F.2d 1371, 1374 (9th Cir. 1991). The government need only make a prima facie showing of authenticity, as `[t]he rule requires only that the court admit evidence if sufficient proof has been introduced so that a reasonable juror could find in favor of authenticity or identification.'  United States v. Black, 767 F.2d 1334, 1342 (9th Cir. 1985) (quoting 5 J. Weinstein & M. Berger, Weinstein's Evidence P 901(a)[01], at 901-16 to -17 (1983)). The government must also establish a connection between the proffered evidence and the defendant. See id. 10 The government made a prima facie showing of authenticity because it presented evidence sufficient to allow a reasonable juror to find that the chat room log printouts were authenticated. In testimony at the evidentiary hearing and at trial, Riva explained how he created the logs with his computer and stated that the printouts, which did not contain the deleted material, appeared to be an accurate representation of the chat room conversations among members of the Orchid Club. See United States v. Catabran, 836 F.2d 453, 458 (9th Cir. 1988) (Any question as to the accuracy of the printouts . . . would have affected only the weight of the printouts, not their admissibility.). Furthermore, the parties vigorously argued the issue of completeness of the chat room log evidence to the jury. See United States v. Soulard , 730 F.2d 1292, 1298 (9th Cir. 1984) ([O]nce adequate foundational showings of authenticity and relevancy have been made, the issue of completeness then bears on the Government's burden of proof and is an issue for the jury to resolve.). 11 The government also established a connection between Tank and the chat room log printouts. There is no question that the chat room log printouts were relevant to prove the conspiracy charge in the indictment and Tank's participation in the conspiracy. Tank admitted that he used the screen name Cessna when he participated in one of the conversations recorded in the chat room log printouts. Additionally, several co-conspirators testified that Tank used the chat room screen name Cessna that appeared throughout the printouts. They further testified thatwhen they arranged a meeting with the person who used the screen name Cessna, it was Tank who showed up. 12 On the record before us, it is clear that the government made an adequate foundational showing of the relevance and the authenticity of the chat room log printouts. Thus, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion by admitting the printouts into evidence and allowing the jury to decide what weight to give that evidence. 5