Evidence: authentication

All of the Library

Library edition words from Federal Rules of Evidence

Rule 901: what authenticating an item takes, and the rule’s ten examples.

Either way you get your own copy to change, add to and share.

Words from
Federal Rules of Evidence (as amended to Dec. 1, 2024). Enacted law, free to use.
Edition
Federal Rules of Evidence, as amended to Dec. 1, 2024 (House Judiciary Committee print)
Checked
Word for word against the source, on 17 October 2026.
How it was made
Each card is a rule’s own words, under its number and heading; a list becomes the card’s items.Words split across lines are joined, an item’s closing “; and” is dropped, and the print’s two single quotation marks are set as one double mark.
Edited by
Aheadso chose the cards and set them out.Every word on them is the source’s.
On the shelf
Law, Evidence · 13 cards

The cards

  1. FRE 901Authenticating or Identifying Evidence
  2. FRE 901(a): In GeneralTo satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is.
  3. FRE 901(b): The following are examples only—not a complete list—of evidence that satisfies the requirement
    1. 1Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge
    2. 2Nonexpert Opinion About Handwriting
    3. 3Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of Fact
    4. 4Distinctive Characteristics and the Like
    5. 5Opinion About a Voice
    6. 6Evidence About a Telephone Conversation
    7. 7Evidence About Public Records
    8. 8Evidence About Ancient Documents or Data Compilations
    9. 9Evidence About a Process or System
    10. 10Methods Provided by a Statute or Rule
  4. FRE 901(b)(1): Testimony of a Witness with KnowledgeTestimony that an item is what it is claimed to be.
  5. FRE 901(b)(2): Nonexpert Opinion About HandwritingA nonexpert’s opinion that handwriting is genuine, based on a familiarity with it that was not acquired for the current litigation.
  6. FRE 901(b)(3): Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of FactA comparison with an authenticated specimen by an expert witness or the trier of fact.
  7. FRE 901(b)(4): Distinctive Characteristics and the LikeThe appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all the circumstances.
  8. FRE 901(b)(5): Opinion About a VoiceAn opinion identifying a person’s voice—whether heard firsthand or through mechanical or electronic transmission or recording—based on hearing the voice at any time under circumstances that connect it with the alleged speaker.
  9. FRE 901(b)(6): For a telephone conversation, evidence that a call was made to the number assigned at the time to
    1. 1a particular person, if circumstances, including self-identification, show that the person answering was the one called
    2. 2a particular business, if the call was made to a business and the call related to business reasonably transacted over the telephone
  10. FRE 901(b)(7): Evidence About Public Records
    1. 1a document was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law
    2. 2a purported public record or statement is from the office where items of this kind are kept
    Evidence that:
  11. FRE 901(b)(8): For a document or data compilation, evidence that it
    1. 1is in a condition that creates no suspicion about its authenticity
    2. 2was in a place where, if authentic, it would likely be
    3. 3is at least 20 years old when offered
  12. FRE 901(b)(9): Evidence About a Process or SystemEvidence describing a process or system and showing that it produces an accurate result.
All 13 cards
  1. FRE 901(b)(10): Methods Provided by a Statute or RuleAny method of authentication or identification allowed by a federal statute or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court.

Corrections

No corrections yet.

More on this shelf

Every card here is copied word for word from its source.None of it is written by AI.