United States v. Yeley-Davis

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that - \testimony concerning how cell phone towers operate constituted expert testimony because it involved specialized knowledge not readily accessible to any ordinary person\
• concluding that - \testimony concerning how cell phone towers operate constituted expert testimony because it involved specialized knowledge not readily accessible to any ordinary person\
• holding that an exhibit composed of authenticated cell phone records, created solely at the request of law enforcement for use in a prosecution, qualified as a business record under the federal business records exception
• holding that neither cell phone records nor their authenticating documents were testimonial
• holding that an exhibit composed of authenticated cell phone records, created solely at the request of law enforcement for use in a prosecution, qualified as a business record under the federal business records exception
• holding that cell phone records were not testimonial because they were created for the administration of the phone company’s affairs “and not for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact at trial”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).