United States v. Lamons

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 machine generated compact disk of data automatically collected from phone calls made to an airline’s corporate toll-free number was not hearsay because it was not a statement by a human
• concluding that a computer-generated spreadsheet of telephone billing data was not hearsay
• reasoning that “raw billing data . . . recorded onto . . . data reels” by a machine was “not [the] statement[] of [a] person[]”
• observing no Confrontation Clause violation where software- decrypted cell phone records were introduced into evidence
• no error where limiting instruction regarding 404 (b) evidence given at the close of evidence
• “The exemption of machine- generated statements from the purview of the Confrontation Clause also makes sense in light of the purposes of confrontation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).