Sublet, Harris & Monge-Martinez v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that our adoption of Md. Rule 5-901 was intended to codify our common law of evidence, which was based upon Federal Rule of Evidence 901(a)
• stating that authentication of evidence “merely renders [it] admissible, leaving the issue of its ultimate reliability to the jury.”
• stating that authentication of evidence “merely renders [it] admissible, leaving the issue of its ultimate reliability to the jury.”
• describing the “first and most obvious method for authentication” as asking the purported author if they wrote the messages
• upholding the authentication of Twitter messages that “referenced a plan” for retaliation “that had . . . been created in response to events occurring that same day” and was known by “only a small pool of [seven] individuals,” including the defendant
• upholding the authentication of Twitter messages that “referenced a 9 plan” for retaliation “that had . . . been created in response to events occurring that 10 same day” and was known by “only a small pool of [seven] individuals,” including 11 the defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).