Key v. Miano

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a social media profile page was not properly authenticated where the government offered evidence only that the webpage existed and not that it belonged to the defendant
• recognizing that “the contents or ‘distinctive characteristics’ of a document can sometimes alone provide circumstantial evidence sufficient for authentication,” as where the contents were not a matter of common knowledge
• holding that the government failed to authenticate what it alleged was a printout of the defendant's profile page from a Russian social networking site where it offered no evidence to show that the defendant had created the page
• noting that Griffin requires \greater scrutiny\ and stating \we are skeptical that such scrutiny is required\
• holding that evidence was insufficient to establish authenticity under Rule 901
• noting that “the proponent need not rule out all possibilities inconsistent with authenticity, or prove beyond any doubt that the evidence is what it purports to be.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).