U.S. v. Chapman

In prosecution on drug distribution charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s request for appointment of third expert witness for purpose of examining informant’s recording of drug transaction between defendant and informant. Dist. Ct. had granted defendant’s two prior requests for appointment of expert to examine said recording, and both experts found no relevant abnormality with respect to said recording. Moreover, defendant failed to present any evidence supporting his theory that recording had been tampered with or that software that govt. used to transfer recording to DVD contained flaw. Also, admission of instant DVD recording did not violate Best Evidence Rule, even though DVD constituted duplicate of original recording, since defendant failed in his burden to raise question regarding authenticity of original recording.