Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

BALCO Laboratories, Inc. was engaged in blood and urine analysis. P began to investigate BALCO, suspecting the company of distributing illegal performance-enhancing drugs to athletes and then laundering the proceeds. P raided BALCO and discovered evidence that it contends linked both trainer Greg Anderson (Anderson) and BALCO to numerous professional athletes. One of these athletes was D. P also found blood and urine test records, which, it asserts, established that Bonds tested positive for steroids. Anderson had taken blood and urine samples to BALCO Director of Operations James Valente (Valente) and identified them as having come from D. After testing, BALCO would send D's blood samples to LabOne & Specialty Lab for analysis. The government seized the log sheets from BALCO, along with the lab test results. Before the grand jury, D testified that he had known Anderson since grade school. In 1998, Anderson started working out with D and aiding him with his weight training. Anderson provided D with substances including 'vitamins and protein shakes,' 'flaxseed oil,' and a 'cream.' P claims some or all of these items contained steroids. P claims some or all of these items contained steroids. Anderson provided the items at no cost to D. D took whatever supplements and creams Anderson gave him without question because he trusted Anderson as his friend. D specifically denied that Anderson ever told him the cream was actually a steroid cream. D testified before the grand jury that Anderson would take D's blood to BALCO to determine any nutritional deficiencies in his body. Bonds said that he would only allow his own 'personal doctor' to take the blood for the samples. D provided four urine samples to Anderson, and he believed the urine samples were also going to be used to analyze his nutrition. Anderson delivered these samples to Valente at BALCO for analysis. P showed D numerous results of blood and urine tests, but D denied ever having seen them before. D testified that Anderson verbally and informally relayed the results of any tests to him. D stated that Anderson told him that he tested negative for steroids. D admitted to paying Anderson $ 15,000 a year for training. A grand jury indicted Anderson and other BALCO figures for their illegal steroid distribution. Anderson pled guilty to these charges and admitted to distributing performance-enhancing drugs to professional athletes. P went after D for perjury. Anderson has continuously refused to testify against D or in any way aid P in this investigation and has spent time imprisoned for contempt. P indicted D on ten counts of making false statements during his grand jury testimony and one count of obstruction of justice. D filed a motion in limine to exclude numerous pieces of evidence that P contends links D to steroids. D moved to exclude two principal categories of evidence: the laboratory blood and urine test results, and the BALCO log sheets of test results. P's identification proof was to be Anderson's identification of the samples given to Valente as D's. P wanted to introduce Valente's testimony that Anderson told him for each sample that 'This blood/urine comes from Barry Bonds.' D argued that Anderson's statements were inadmissible hearsay and that the lab results could not be authenticated. P went through a laundry list of reasons why the statements were admissible: they were against Anderson's penal interest (FRE 804(b)(3)), they were statements of a co-conspirator (FRE 801(d)(2)(E)), and they were admissible under the residual exception (FRE 807). The court ruled against P. P sought to introduce the log sheets, arguing that the log sheets were admissible as non-hearsay business records, or as statements of a conspirator, as statements against penal interest, or admissible under the residual exception to hearsay. The district court ruled the log sheets were inadmissible to establish that the samples tested were from D. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.