Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

09-3591 & 10-1355 U.S. v. Cruz-Rea

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 17, 2010//

09-3591 & 10-1355 U.S. v. Cruz-Rea

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//November 17, 2010//

Listen to this article

Evidence
Voice identification; foundation

Where a police officer had listened to a 15-second voice exemplar, it was not error to admit his identification of recorded conversation as the defendant’s voice.

“We cannot say as a matter of law that the low bar of minimal familiarity was not met in this case. Officer Toy testified that she became familiar with Cruz-Rea’s voice by listening to an approximately fifteen second voice exemplar at least fifty to sixty times. Officer Toy then identified Cruz-Rea’s voice on twenty-four wiretapped telephone conversations, including a conversation in which Cruz-Rea offered to sell cocaine that was ‘good for the frying pan’ and a conversation in which Cruz- Rea discussed his plan to ship cocaine to Indianapolis via a car hauler carrying a Ford Explorer. Two different witnesses testified to having these exact conversations with Cruz-Rea on the telephone. Although neither of the two witnesses offered any voice identification testimony in court, their corroborating testimony tends to establish the accuracy of Officer Toy’s voice identification. Given the length of the voice exemplar and the number of times that Officer Toy listened to the exemplar, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the government had laid sufficient foundation for Officer Toy’s voice identification testimony under Rule 901(b)(5). See Neighbors, 590 F.3d at 493- 94. The accuracy and reliability of the testimony was a question for the jury to weigh, and the court properly admitted the corroborating testimony to aid the jury in this role. Jones, 600 F.3d at 858. We stress, however, that we arrive at this conclusion without the benefit of empirical evidence on the reliability of voice identifications, and as previously cautioned by this court in Jones, we can imagine a case in which the foundation for the voice identification testimony was so flimsy as to be deemed insufficient. Id.”

Affirmed.

09-3591 & 10-1355 U.S. v. Cruz-Rea

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Young, J., Bauer, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests