Smith V. Sate Case Study

1. When is hearsay evidence admissible in court?
Answer: The hearsay rule prohibits statements made outside of court to be offered as proof, in admitting evidence. However there are exceptions to the hearsay rule, which includes statements made in 1) excitement utterance, this is defined as statements made while the declarant was under stress of excitement which caused it. 2) Present impression, statements made during or right after the declarant perceived it. 3) There are various records rules; such as public records which are marriage, death, and birth if reported to legal office, observations made while on public duty like how many times an officer has had disciplinary actions against him or her while on duty. Cases filed in courts prior
to the current case. Records of family and religion.
2. For this question, you must search for an interpret information in a cybercrime case that dealt with admitting hearsay evidence in criminal or civil court. Provide a brief description of the case and discuss the role of hearsay evidence in it. You should be able to identify how or why the evidence was admissible or inadmissible. Within your analysis, do not forget to identify and include other types of evidence presented in the case (e.g. direct, circumstantial, etc.). Finally, discuss the impact of the challenges to the authencity of the evidence on the outcome of the case.

ANSWER; On June 4th 2013 the appeals court in Mississippi addressed the authentication and hearsay arguments in the Smith v.
Sate case. Facebook messages were admitted in court as evidence. In this case the defendant was convicted of capital murder, in the death of his 17 month old step daughter. The messages that were admitted in court was between the defendant and his wife. The defendant argument was that “the messages were not properly authenticated and were hearsay”. However the court ruled against his claims and stated that. Automatically generated messages such as emails cannot be hearsay. There were two types of messages admitted into court; one was an email and the other message was a wall posting from Smith on his wife page, lets breakdown why down the the case so you can understand why the messages were admitted into court. If you have any social media account then you know once someone comments on a picture, likes a picture or send you a messages, then you are automatically notified either the message pops up on your phone or comes into your email, one cannot manipulate something that is automatically generated. Additionally Mississippi rule of evidence 801 allows such messages and allows “messages were admissions by the party-opponent”. Thus the mother’s message could not be
hearsay.

3. How do the ECPA and the USA Patriot Act regulate the interception of electronic communications, government access to those communications, and government access to ISP records?
Answer: The ECPA is a statue which prohibits a third party from intercepting and disclosing private communications without approval. In 1968 the ECPA updated the Federal Wiretap Act, the act which addressed intercepting conversations on telephones, however it did not address digital devices, computers and electronic communications, because of new developments in technology legislations, later were made amendments to the ECPA and the U.S Patriot Act, which now address electronic communication The Electronic Communications Privacy Act after protects against stored communications on computers, this includes emails, and telephone conversations. There are exceptions to the ECPA, such as schools and employers may have the right to monitor computers and emails.

4. Is all evidence that is illegally searched and seized inadmissible in court? Why do you think this is the case?
Answer: the fourth Amendment guarantees the right to unreasonable search and seizures. Thus if law enforcement officials conducts a search without warrants, plain view evidence, or inevitable discovery, it is deemed illegal therefore cannot be admitted in court and used against you. I believe this is very important, not only for privacy reasons, but for government officials not to abuse their power, it also protects both party in court,

5. How is the "reasonable expectation of privacy" test applied to computers?
Answer; the reasonable expectation of privacy as it applies to computers, is contingent on where the computer is located, if the computer is located in a work, school, or library ( does not include personal laptop) that the fourth amendment rule does not apply, therefore the computer can be seized or search without your permission, or warrant. If the desktop or laptop is in your private dwelling such as your home, car, and bags.

References
1) Hearsay rule.(n.d.).Retrieved,June,13,2015,from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/hearsay_rule
2) Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule against Hearsay. (n.d.). Retrieved June 13, 2015, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_803 (n.d)

3) 2015,fromhttps://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/litigationnews/top_stories/081913-facebook-messages-authentic.html

4) Facebook Messages Admissible under Traditional Evidence Rules. (n.d.). Retrieved June 13, 2015,fromhttps://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/litigationnews/top_stories/081913- facebook-messages-authentic.html

5) Privacy &Civil Liberties.(n.d.).RetrievedJune13,2015,from https://it.ojp.gov/default.aspx?area=privacy&page=1285