Sublet v. State
| Citation | 442 Md. 632,113 A.3d 695 |
| Decision Date | 23 April 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 59 Sept. Term, 2014,No. 42 Sept. Term, 2014,No. 60 Sept. Term, 2014,42 Sept. Term, 2014,59 Sept. Term, 2014,60 Sept. Term, 2014 |
| Parties | Albert SUBLET IV v. STATE of Maryland. Tavares D. Harris v. State of Maryland. Carlos Alberto Monge–Martinez v. State of Maryland. |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
442 Md. 632
113 A.3d 695
Albert SUBLET IV
v.
STATE of Maryland.
Tavares D. Harris
v.
State of Maryland.
Carlos Alberto Monge–Martinez
v.
State of Maryland.
No. 42 Sept. Term, 2014
No. 59 Sept. Term, 2014
No. 60 Sept. Term, 2014
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
April 23, 2015.
Matthew Joseph (Douglas Baruch, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shiver & Jacobson, LLP, Washington, DC, Anne K. Olesen, George Washington University Community Law Clinics, Washington, DC), on brief, for petitioner in 42, Sept. Term, 2014.
Edward J. Kelley, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Brian E. Frosh, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, Baltimore, MD), on brief, for respondent in 42, Sept. Term, 2014.
Daniel Kobrin, Asst. Public Defender (Paul B. DeWolfe, Public Defender of Maryland, Baltimore, MD), on brief, for appellant in 59, Sept. Term, 2014.
Brenda Gruss, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Douglas F. Gansler, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, Baltimore, MD), on brief, for appellee in 59, Sept. Term, 2014.
Michael T. Torres, Asst. Public Defender (Paul B. DeWolfe, Public Defender of Maryland, Baltimore, MD), on brief, for petitioner in 60, Sept. Term, 2014.
Todd W. Hesel, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Douglas F. Gansler, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, Baltimore, MD), on brief, for respondent in 60, Sept. Term, 2014.
Argued before BARBERA, C.J., HARRELL, BATTAGLIA, GREENE, ADKINS, McDONALD, WATTS, JJ.
Opinion
BATTAGLIA, J.
The rapid rise of social networking websites,1 themselves a branch of social media,2 once again gives us cause to explore the authentication of documents related to this genre, under Maryland Rule 5–901, which provides that the “requirement of
authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims”, in three cases, Sublet v. State, Harris v. State and Monge–Martinez v. State, consolidated for the purposes of this opinion. All three cases involve the same legal issues, those being the elucidation and implementation of our opinion in Griffin v. State, 419 Md. 343, 19 A.3d 415 (2011), in which we addressed the admissibility of a screenshot3 of a MySpace4 page, and its application to the
authentication of screenshots of messages allegedly sent through social networking websites; in Sublet, via a Facebook5 timeline;6 in Harris, on
Twitter7 through “direct messages”8 and public “tweets”;9 and, in Monge–Martinez, through Facebook messages.10
We shall hold that, in order to authenticate evidence derived from a social networking website, the trial judge must determine that there is proof from which a reasonable juror could find that the evidence is what the proponent claims it to be. We shall hold in Sublet that the trial court did not err in excluding the admission of the four pages of the Facebook conversation. We shall hold in Harris that the trial court did not err in admitting the “direct messages” and “tweets” in evidence. We shall also hold in Monge–Martinez that the trial court did not err in admitting the Facebook messages authored by Monge–Martinez.
Sublet v. State
Albert Sublet, the first Petitioner herein, was charged by indictment in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County with three counts of first degree assault, second degree assault and reckless endangerment, as well as with one count of carrying a deadly weapon with intent to injure. The charges against Sublet arose out of a fight that occurred among Sublet, Chrishell Parker, her mother and her sister, in late October of 2012. According to the State's theory of the case, Sublet
became aggressive when he arrived at Ms. Parker's apartment to pick up his girlfriend, Ymani Conner, and initiated an altercation; Sublet urged, conversely, that it was Ms. Parker who was the instigator.
During cross-examination of Ms. Parker, Sublet's counsel sought to introduce into evidence four pages alleged to have been a printout from Ms. Parker's Facebook page of a “conversation” among seven different
individuals. The document submitted to Ms. Parker for review consisted of four pages and written across the top of each page was “printed on 10•30•12 from Facebook”.11 Each of the nineteen entries in the four pages contained the name of the profile that had allegedly created it, as well as the time the entry was created. Next to the name of the profile was also a picture. The four pages were collectively received for identification as Defense Exhibit A.12
With respect to the conversation in issue, the first page began on “Saturday” with a statement associated with the profile “Chanica DatBytch Brown”, which Ms. Parker identified as Ms. Brown's Facebook username, while the fourth post on the first page was related to the name “Cece Parker”. When asked if she had discussed the altercation on Facebook, Ms. Parker stated that she had connected with Chanica Brown through Facebook and that she herself used the name Cece Parker:
[ATTORNEY FOR SUBLET]: Well, have you discussed [the fight] in social media?
[MS. PARKER]: Social media?
[ATTORNEY FOR SUBLET]: Like Facebook?
[MS. PARKER]: Well, I'm not going—people inboxed me and said I heard what happened to you, are you okay? And, yes, I have discussed it on Social Network.
[ATTORNEY FOR SUBLET]: Okay. And you discussed it with a lady by the name of Shanika [sic] Brown, is that correct?
[MS. PARKER]: Yes.
[ATTORNEY FOR SUBLET]: And with a lady by the name of CiCi [sic] Parker?
[MS. PARKER]: That's me.
The posts depicted on the first page were:
Chanica DatBytch Brown
Saturday via Mobile
Had a BLAST lastnight ... Shit got hectic hahaha ymani has more to come.. lmaowack bytch
Share
• 2 people like this
CanDii SoSeductive P Smhh
Saturday at 13:12 via mobile
Camerin Kill'Ent Johnson Yessssssa lol
Saturday at 14:15 via mobile
Cece Parker yea everytime i see that bitch ima fuck that dirty pussy bitch up. shout out to cam cam u was riden
Saturday at 15:42 via mobile • 1
Tyesha Glover hahahahaha yea whore i agree ........@ cece the whole hood was ridin
Saturday at 17:24
Cece Parker yea.. dey was tho that shit was crazy
Saturday at 20:27 via mobile • 1
On the second page was a single entry affiliated with the user name “Zaquane Graham” lamenting being left out of the conversation:
Zaquane Graham Yall n[* * * *]s maken me mad not tellin a n[* * *]a was goin on the way i feel im sayin fuck it dam im way down here and yall not tryin to keep me postedon was goin on u know wat fuck it i dn want to know
Yesterday at 18:42 via mobile
On page three, Ms. Brown purportedly conversed with “ Zaquane Graham” and “Tonisha Brown”:
Chanica DatBytch Brown
Yesterday via Mobile
She still tawkn shit mmmhm but u want to block me u not real ymani Conner u can keep hiding u an ya broke ass man that jus started working at bed bath an beyond out in the mall we will find yal or shuld i say u cuz he goin jail i got his pic lmao stupid hoe kp ya legs close bitch dont go down gardens cuz (INSIDER) its not safe lol
Share
• 3 people like this.
Zaquane Graham Dammm thats real talk y yall fightin anyway im about o kick both yall assess y yall fightin
Yesterday at 15:02 via mobile
Tonisha Brown I love you..you got me pissed off so take ya time...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Gray
...15-1359 at p. 7, 192 So.3d at 840. We thus turned to out-Page 28 of-state and federal jurisprudence for guidance. Citing Sublet v. State, 442 Md. 632, 113 A.3d 695 (2015), we noted, as Mr. Gray paraphrases in his appellate brief, that there are three common and acceptable methods to authent......
-
Pifer v. Irwin Indus. Tool Co.
...proof has been introduced so that a reasonable juror could find in favor of authenticity or identification." Sublet v. State , 442 Md. 632, 666, 113 A.3d 695 (2015) (quoting United States v. Vayner , 769 F.3d 125, 129–30 (2d Cir. 2014) ); see also Jackson v. State , 460 Md. 107, 122, 188 A.......
-
Commonwealth v. Meola
...tends to verify the remainder.’ [7 J.] Wigmore, [Evidence] § 2129 [ (Chadbourn Rev. 1978) ]." (Emphasis omitted.)Sublet v. State, 442 Md. 632, 656, 113 A.3d 695 (2015).Cases sometimes refer to the gatekeeper's determination as a preliminary finding of fact under Massachusetts law, reflected......
-
State v. Jesenya O.
...IL App (2d) 140917, ¶ 118, 415 Ill.Dec. 56, 81 N.E.3d 578 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Sublet v. State , 442 Md. 632, 113 A.3d 695, 713 (2015) ("[A]nyone can create a fictitious account and masquerade under another person's name or can gain access to another's a......
-
Witness
...to whether the personal opinion shall be excluded, and not merely to the weight of the personal opinion testimony. Sublet v. State , 113 A.3d 695, 672-73 (Md. 2015). The trial court did not err in excluding evidence from a social media account because the witness denied having personal know......
-
Authentication
...the prosecution tracked Facebook pages and accounts to defendant’s email addresses via internet protocol addresses Sublet v. State , 113 A.3d 695 (Md. App. 2015). Authentication of a profile on a social network site depends upon whether the profile was created by its purported owner and/or ......
-
Authentication
...the prosecution tracked Facebook pages and accounts to defendant’s email addresses via internet protocol addresses Sublet v. State , 113 A.3d 695 (Md. App. 2015). Authentication of a proile on a social network site depends upon whether the proile was created by its purported owner and/or wh......
-
Authentication
...the prosecution tracked Facebook pages and accounts to defendant’s email addresses via internet protocol addresses Sublet v. State , 113 A.3d 695 (Md. App. 2015). Authentication of a proile on a social network site depends upon whether the proile was created by its purported owner and/or wh......