People v. Kent

On direct appeal from his first-degree murder conviction, Defendant argued, in part, that Court erred in admitting a Facebook post without sufficient authentication. During trial, court admitted a screenshot of a Facebook post on a profile under the name “Lorenzo Luckii Santos.” The screenshot showed a photograph of someone allegedly resembling Defendant and an undated post that stated, “its my way or the highway…..leave em dead n his driveway.” The State argued that the Facebook post was properly authenticated by evidence that Defendant’s nickname was “Luckii,” the victim was killed in his driveway, and the photograph allegedly resembled Defendant. This information did not provide circumstantial evidence sufficient for authentication, because the State failed to present any evidence that it was not public knowledge, which would tend to show that Defendant or someone acting on his behalf was responsible for the communication. Additionally, the State pointed to a detective’s testimony about the fleeting nature of the post. The detective testified that, on the day after the shooting, he discovered the post about 2 p.m. but it was deleted later that day. The State’s theory was that, after Defendant shot the victim, he created the post to boast of the offense, but thought better of making an incriminating statement on the Internet and deleted the post. However, the detective could not say when the post was created, and he had no way of knowing that its disappearance from his view was due to deletion and not a change in privacy settings. The State presented no evidence that Defendant ever accessed Facebook or even used the Internet, nor circumstances surrounding the post’s creation to show that Defendant was responsible for its contents. Thus, Court committed reversible error in admitting the Facebook post and Defendant was entitled to a new trial.