United States v. Saelee

162 F.Supp. 2d 1097 (2001)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was indicted on three counts of violating federal drug laws. The opium in question was concealed in Butterfinger candy bars which appeared to have been express mailed from the United States but then returned to the sender after delivery was unsuccessful. The Government had John W. Cawley, III, a forensic document analyst with the United States Postal Inspection Service National Forensic Laboratory, compare hand printing exemplars provided by D with the hand printing on the address labels on the packages in question. Cawley concluded that D was the writer of one of the questioned writings and was probably the writer of another. D filed the instant motion to exclude all testimony by Cawley at trial. The Government quickly changed course and proposed to have Cawley testify only about the similarities and differences between the known writing and the documents and not to have Cawley testify about his ultimate conclusions as to whether D authored the questioned documents pursuant to Rule 701, which governs the admissibility of lay opinion testimony. D eventually argued that if admissible the testimony could only be admissible under Rule 702, Federal Rules of Evidence, which governs the admissibility of expert testimony. A Daubert hearing was held and the Government argued that Cawley’s testimony was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 901, which deals with the authentication and identification of evidence. D's motion was granted.