United States v. Oreckinto Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 45,900 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks ► www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...
United States v. Oreckinto, 234 F. Supp. 3d 360 (2017)
Using rules originally intended for physical documents and tangible objects, courts must decide whether evidence obtained from the internet, like social-media postings, email, and text messages, is admissible. In United States versus Oreckinto, a federal district court considered how an internet image could be authenticated.
Thousands of cartons of cigarettes were stolen from a warehouse. Surveillance video showed the burglar wearing a mask and black clothing. The clothing on the burglar’s upper body was decorated with the stylized letters SP. Police charged Andrew Oreckinto with the burglary. To identify Oreckinto as the thief, the prosecution attempted to show that Oreckinto had worn similar clothing in the past.
Without objection, the prosecution submitted into evidence a social-media photo of Oreckinto wearing a black hooded sweatshirt under a black leather jacket. Enough of the sweatshirt was visible to see stylized lettering or a design that could be consistent with the burglar’s sweatshirt. To help the jury compare the burglar’s outfit with Oreckinto’s clothing in the photo, the prosecution offered images of the distinctive type of sweatshirt that it contended both Oreckinto and the burglar were wearing.
A detective obtained these images through an internet search. The detective testified at trial that he ran an internet search for black and white hooded SP sweatshirts. The search retrieved images of a SouthPole brand of sweatshirt. The detective recognized SouthPole as a commercial clothing brand but couldn’t recall whether he’d found the images on SouthPole’s company web page or another website. He couldn’t recall the particular website from which he’d copied the images. The detective never contacted any manufacturer to confirm that it had made this kind of sweatshirt or when the sweatshirt had been for sale.
Oreckinto filed a motion in limine to exclude the internet images of the SouthPole sweatshirt, arguing that they hadn’t been authenticated as required by Federal Rule of Evidence 901. The district court ruled on Oreckinto’s motion.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: www.quimbee.com/cases/united-...
The Quimbee App features over 45,900 case briefs keyed to 984 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: www.quimbee.com/cases/united-...
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our RUclips Channel ► ruclips.net/user/subscription_...
Quimbee Case Brief App ► www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...
Facebook ► / quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► / quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries