Copyright © 2010

Thomson Reuters

Chapter 9

AUTHENTICATION

Table of Sections

Sec.

9.00 The Requirement of Authentication.

9.01 Authentication Under the California Evidence Code.

9.02 Authentication Under the Federal Rules.

-----

§ 9.00 The Requirement of Authentication

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE

Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence

(a) In General. To 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.

<EN>---

CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE CODE

§ 1400. Authentication

Authentication of a writing means (a) the introduction of evidence sufficient to sustain a finding that it is the writing that the proponent of the evidence claims it is or (b) the establishment of such facts by any other means provided by law.

§ 1401. Authentication required

(a) Authentication of a writing is required before it may be received in evidence.

(b) Authentication of a writing is required before secondary evidence of its content may be received in evidence.

<EN>---

Comparative Note. Whenever a writing is offered in evidence, the proponent must also offer enough evidence to permit the judge to find that the writing is what the proponent claims it to be. If, for example, the plaintiff offers a writing which he claims is the contract that he and the defendant entered into, then the plaintiff must offer some evidence indicating that the writing is indeed that contract. If the writing is not the contract, then the writing is irrelevant and inadmissible.

Because Rule 901(a) and Evidence Code § 1400 impose only a sufficiency test for purposes of admissibility, the role of the judge is quite limited. If, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the judge concludes that a reasonable jury could find the writing to be the contract, then the judge must let the issue of the contract's authenticity go to the jury. The defendant is entitled to offer evidence disputing the writing's authenticity, but such evidence will not prevent the introduction of the writing so long as the plaintiff's evidence meets the sufficiency standard. It is up to the jury, not the judge, to decide from all of the evidence whether the writing is in fact the contract entered into by the parties. Indeed, if the writing is received, the defendant can require the judge to instruct the jurors to disregard the writing unless they first find that it is the contract. The instruction, coupled with the limited power given to the judge to determine the writing's authenticity, assures that the parties will not be deprived of the right to have the jury pass on a material factual issue.

Although authentication is usually associated with writings, the concept applies whenever any tangible object is offered in evidence. Whether the object be the gun the prosecution believes the accused used to kill the victim or the ladder the plaintiff claims was defective, the proponent must connect the object with the case. Showing that the object is relevant to the issues to be decided will require some evidence that the object is what the proponent claims it is. For purposes of admissibility, the quantum of evidence, as in the case of writings, need satisfy only a sufficiency standard.1

The requirement of authentication under Rule 901(a) and § 1400 is the same.

§ 9.01 Authentication Under the California Evidence Code

CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE CODE

§ 643. Authenticity of ancient document

A deed or will or other writing purporting to create, terminate, or affect an interest in real or personal property is presumed to be authentic if it:

(a) Is at least 30 years old;

(b) Is in such condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity;

(c) Was kept, or if found was found, in a place where such writing, if authentic, would be likely to be kept or found; and

(d) Has been generally acted upon as authentic by persons having an interest in the matter.

§ 644. Book purporting to be published by public authority

A book, purporting to be printed or published by public authority, is presumed to have been so printed or published.

§ 645. Book purporting to contain reports of cases

A book, purporting to contain reports of cases adjudged in the tribunals of the state or nation where the book is published, is presumed to contain correct reports of such cases.

§ 645.1. Printed materials purporting to be particular newspaper or periodical

Printed materials, purporting to be a particular newspaper or periodical, are presumed to be that newspaper or periodical if regularly issued at average intervals not exceeding three months.

§ 1402. Authentication of altered writings

The party producing a writing as genuine which has been altered, or appears to have been altered, after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must account for the alteration or appearance thereof. He may show that the alteration was made by another, without his concurrence, or was made with the consent of the parties affected by it, or otherwise properly or innocently made, or that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. If he does that, he may give the writing in evidence, but not otherwise.

§ 1410. Article not exclusive

Nothing in this article shall be construed to limit the means by which a writing may be authenticated or proved.

§ 1410.5. Graffiti constitutes a writing; admissibility

(a) For purposes of this chapter, a writing shall include any graffiti consisting of written words, insignia, symbols, or any other markings which convey a particular meaning.

(b) Any writing described in subdivision (a), or any photograph thereof, may be admitted into evidence in an action for vandalism, for the purpose of proving that the writing was made by the defendant.

(c) The admissibility of any fact offered to prove that the writing was made by the defendant shall, upon motion of the defendant, be ruled upon outside the presence of the jury, and is subject to the requirements of Sections 1416, 1417, and 1418.

§ 1411. Subscribing witness' testimony unnecessary

Except as provided by statute, the testimony of a subscribing witness is not required to authenticate a writing.

§ 1412. Use of other evidence when subscribing witness' testimony required

If the testimony of a subscribing witness is required by statute to authenticate a writing and the subscribing witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the writing, the writing may be authenticated by other evidence.

§ 1413. Witness to the execution of a writing

A writing may be authenticated by anyone who saw the writing made or executed, including a subscribing witness.

§ 1414. Admission of authenticity; acting upon writing as authentic

A writing may be authenticated by evidence that:

(a) The party against whom it is offered has at any time admitted its authenticity; or

(b) The writing has been acted upon as authentic by the party against whom it is offered.

§ 1415. Authentication by handwriting evidence

A writing may be authenticated by evidence of the genuineness of the handwriting of the maker.

§ 1416. Proof of handwriting by person familiar therewith

A witness who is not otherwise qualified to testify as an expert may state his opinion whether a writing is in the handwriting of a supposed writer if the court finds that he has personal knowledge of the handwriting of the supposed writer. Such personal knowledge may be acquired from:

(a) Having seen the supposed writer write;

(b) Having seen a writing purporting to be in the handwriting of the supposed writer and upon which the supposed writer has acted or been charged;

(c) Having received letters in the due course of mail purporting to be from the supposed writer in response to letters duly addressed and mailed by him to the supposed writer; or

(d) Any other means of obtaining personal knowledge of the handwriting of the supposed writer.

§ 1417. Comparison of handwriting by trier of fact

The genuineness of handwriting, or the lack thereof, may be proved by a comparison made by the trier of fact with handwriting (a) which the court finds was admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered or (b) otherwise proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the court.

§ 1418. Comparison of writing by expert witness

The genuineness of writing, or the lack thereof, may be proved by a comparison made by an expert witness with writing (a) which the court finds was admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered or (b) otherwise proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the court.

§ 1419. Exemplars when writing is more than 30 years old

Where a writing whose genuineness is sought to be proved is more than 30 years old, the comparison under Section 1417 or 1418 may be made with writing purporting to be genuine, and generally respected and acted upon as such, by persons having an interest in knowing whether it is genuine.

§ 1420. Authentication by evidence of reply

A writing may be authenticated by evidence that the writing was received in response to a communication sent to the person who is claimed by the proponent of the evidence to be the author of the writing.

§ 1421. Authentication by content

A writing may be authenticated by evidence that the writing refers to or states matters that are unlikely to be known to anyone other than the person who is claimed by the proponent of the evidence to be the author of the writing.

§ 1450. Classification of presumptions in article

The presumptions established by this article are presumptions affecting the burden of producing evidence.

§ 1451. Acknowledged writings

A certificate of the acknowledgment of a writing other than a will, or a certificate of the proof of such a writing, is prima facie evidence of the facts recited in the certificate and the genuineness of the signature of each person by whom the writing purports to have been signed if the certificate meets the requirements of Article 3 (commencing with Section 1180) of Chapter 4, Title 4, Part 4, Division 2 of the Civil Code.

§ 1452. Official seals

A seal is presumed to be genuine and its use authorized if it purports to be the seal of:

(a) The United States or a department, agency, or public employee of the United States.

(b) A public entity in the United States or a department, agency, or public employee of such public entity.

(c) A nation recognized by the executive power of the United States or a department, agency, or officer of such nation.

(d) A public entity in a nation recognized by the executive power of the United States or a department, agency, or officer of such public entity.

(e) A court of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction.

(f) A notary public within any state of the United States.

§ 1453. Domestic official signatures

A signature is presumed to be genuine and authorized if it purports to be the signature, affixed in his official capacity, of:

(a) A public employee of the United States.

(b) A public employee of any public entity in the United States.

(c) A notary public within any state of the United States.

§ 1454. Foreign official signatures

A signature is presumed to be genuine and authorized if it purports to be the signature, affixed in his official capacity, of an officer, or deputy of an officer, of a nation or public entity in a nation recognized by the executive power of the United States and the writing to which the signature is affixed is accompanied by a final statement certifying the genuineness of the signature and the official position of (a) the person who executed the writing or (b) any foreign official who has certified either the genuineness of the signature and official position of the person executing the writing or the genuineness of the signature and official position of another foreign official who has executed a similar certificate in a chain of such certificates beginning with a certificate of the genuineness of the signature and official position of the person executing the writing. The final statement may be made only by a secretary of an embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, consular agent, or other officer in the foreign service of the United States stationed in the nation, authenticated by the seal of his office.

§ 1530. Copy of writing in official custody

(a) A purported copy of a writing in the custody of a public entity, or of an entry in such a writing, is prima facie evidence of the existence and content of such writing or entry if:

(1) The copy purports to be published by the authority of the nation or state, or public entity therein in which the writing is kept;

(2) The office in which the writing is kept is within the United States or within the Panama Canal Zone, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or the Ryukyu Islands, and the copy is attested or certified as a correct copy of the writing or entry by a public employee, or a deputy of a public employee, having the legal custody of the writing; or

(3) The office in which the writing is kept is not within the United States or any other place described in paragraph (2) and the copy is attested as a correct copy of the writing or entry by a person having authority to make attestation. The attestation must be accompanied by a final statement certifying the genuineness of the signature and the official position of (i) the person who attested the copy as a correct copy or (ii) any foreign official who has certified either the genuineness of the signature and official position of the person attesting the copy or the genuineness of the signature and official position of another foreign official who has executed a similar certificate in a chain of such certificates beginning with a certificate of the genuineness of the signature and official position of the person attesting the copy. Except as provided in the next sentence, the final statement may be made only by a secretary of an embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States, or a diplomatic or consular official of the foreign country assigned or accredited to the United States. Prior to January 1, 1971, the final statement may also be made by a secretary of an embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, consular agent, or other officer in the foreign service of the United States stationed in the nation in which the writing is kept, authenticated by the seal of his office. If reasonable opportunity has been given to all parties to investigate the authenticity and accuracy of the documents, the court may, for good cause shown, (i) admit an attested copy without the final statement or (ii) permit the writing or entry in foreign custody to be evidenced by an attested summary with or without a final statement.

(b) The presumptions established by this section are presumptions affecting the burden of producing evidence.

§ 1531. Certification of copy for evidence

For the purpose of evidence, whenever a copy of a writing is attested or certified, the attestation or certificate must state in substance that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or of a specified part thereof, as the case may be.

§ 1552. Printed representation of computer information or computer programs

(a) A printed representation of computer information or a computer program is presumed to be an accurate representation of the computer information or computer program that it purports to represent. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence. If a party to an action introduces evidence that a printed representation of computer information or computer program is inaccurate or unreliable, the party introducing the printed representation into evidence has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of evidence, that the printed representation is an accurate representation of the existence and content of the computer information or computer program that it purports to represent.

(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to computer-generated official records certified in accordance with Section 452.5 or 1530.

§ 1553. Printed representation of images stored on a video or digital medium

A printed representation of images stored on a video or digital medium is presumed to be an accurate representation of the images it purports to represent. This presumption is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence. If a party to an action introduces evidence that a printed representation of images stored on a video or digital medium is inaccurate or unreliable, the party introducing the printed representation into evidence has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of evidence, that the printed representation is an accurate representation of the existence and content of the images that it purports to represent.

<EN>---

Comparative Note. The various Code provisions describing the manner in which the requirement of authentication can be satisfied assume that the object to be authenticated is a writing. Section 1410 states that these provisions are not exclusive; they are illustrative only, and the proponent is free to use any otherwise admissible evidence to identify a writing.

A writing can be authenticated by anyone who saw the writing made or executed (§ 1413). A writing can also be authenticated by evidence that the party against whom it is offered has at any time admitted its authenticity or has treated the writing as authentic (§ 1414). A writing can be authenticated by evidence that the writing was received in response to a communication sent to the person who is claimed by the proponent to be the author of the writing (§ 1420). A writing can also be authenticated by evidence that it refers to or states matters that are unlikely to be known to anyone other than the person claimed by the proponent to be the maker of the writing (§ 1421).

A writing can be authenticated by evidence that the writing is in the handwriting of the maker or, if signed, that the signature is the maker's (§ 1415). A lay witness who has personal knowledge of the maker's handwriting or signature can give an opinion on whether the handwriting or signature is the maker's (§ 1416). The ways in which the witness acquires the personal knowledge include having seen the purported maker write or sign, having seen a writing purporting to be in the handwriting of the supposed maker and upon which the supposed maker has acted, or having received letters in the due course of mail purporting to be from the supposed maker in response to letters duly addressed and mailed by the witness to the supposed maker (§ 1416).

An expert can give an opinion on the authenticity of a writing by comparing the writing with one that has been authenticated as having been prepared or signed by the purported maker (§ 1418). This method applies to any form of writing, not just handwriting, since experts can now compare typewritten specimens and other forms of writing as accurately as they can compare handwriting specimens (§ 1418 Comment).

A handwritten document can also be authenticated by providing the fact finder, whether judge or jury, with a specimen which the court finds was admitted or treated as authentic by the party against whom the handwritten document is offered (§ 1417). In this case, it is the fact finder, rather than the expert, who makes the comparison. In all cases, however, it is up to the fact finder to determine whether the purported writing is in fact what the proponent claims it to be.

Acknowledged Writings. The Civil Procedure Code provides for the "acknowledgment" of such instruments as conveyances.1 An acknowledgment consists of a certificate in which a designated officer certifies that the person signing the instrument personally appeared before the officer and declared to the officer that he signed the instrument in his authorized capacity.2 If the certificate meets the requirements of the Civil Procedure Code, then Evidence Code § 1451 provides that the certificate can be received as prima facie evidence of the facts recited in the certificate and of the authenticity of the signature of the person by whom the instrument purports to have been signed. Since authenticity raises a sufficiency issue, the certificate should permit the proponent to get to the jury on the issue of whether the signature appearing in the instrument is that of the person who appeared before the officer. The Evidence Code, however, does not include wills among acknowledged writings. But the Code does include another presumption favoring the authentication of some documents, including wills, affecting property interests. Section 643 provides that a deed or will or other writing purporting to create, terminate, or affect an interest in real or personal property is presumed to be authentic if the writing is at least 30 years old; is in such condition as to create no suspicion about its authenticity; was kept or, if found, was found in a place where such writing, if authentic, would be likely to be kept or found; and the writing has been generally acted upon as authentic by persons having an interest in the matter. The presumption created by § 643 does not affect the persuasion burden regarding the authenticity of the writing. If the opponent introduces some evidence contesting the document's authenticity, the proponent will have the burden of establishing its authenticity by the appropriate persuasion standard without the benefit of the presumption.

Official Writings: Seals. The presence of certain seals serves to designate the official status of some writings. Section 1452 provides that a seal is presumed to be genuine and its use authorized if it purports to be the seal of the United States, a public entity in the United States, a nation recognized by the United States, a public entity in a nation recognized by the United States, or a notary public within any state of the United States. Accordingly, the presence of such a seal authenticates the writing as an official writing of the entity entitled to the use of the seal. But the presumption created by § 1452 is one affecting only the burden of producing evidence. If the party opposing the writing introduces evidence sufficient to sustain a finding that the seal is not genuine or its use is not authorized, then the fact finder will have to determine the authenticity of the writing, including the seal, without recourse to any presumption. If, on the other hand, the opponent introduces no evidence challenging the genuineness of the seal or its use, then the fact finder will be required to find that the writing is authentic.

Signatures can serve the same function as seals in designating certain writings as official. Section 1453 provides that a signature is presumed to be genuine and authorized if it purports to be the signature, affixed in an official capacity, of a public employee of the United States or any public entity in the United States, or of a notary public within any state of the United States.3 Accordingly, the presence of such a signature will authenticate the writing as an official writing of the entity of the employee whose signature appears. The presumption created by § 1453 is the same as the presumption created by § 1452. If the party opposing the writing introduces evidence sufficient to sustain a finding that the signature is not genuine or not authorized, then the fact finder will have to determine the authenticity of the writing without recourse to the presumption. If the opponent fails to challenge the genuineness of the signature or its use, then the fact finder must find that the document is authentic.

Official Writings: Attestations and Certifications. Section 1530(a) provides that an official writing may be proved by a copy purporting to be published by the authority of the national, state, or public entity in which the writing is kept. An official writing kept in the United States may also be proved by a copy if it is attested or certified as a correct copy of the official writing by a public employee having legal custody of the writing. Although the attestation or certification is an out of court statement asserting the copy's authenticity, the attestation or certification may be received for the truth as an exception to the hearsay rule.4

California Computerized Information. The Evidence Code treats computerized information as presenting essentially problems to be resolved under California's Secondary Evidence Rule. Sections 1552–1553 address these problems which are discussed in Chapter 10. The Federal Rules, as will be seen, treat these problems as presenting issues of authentication.

§ 9.02 Authentication Under the Federal Rules

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE

RULE 901. REQUIREMENT OF AUTHENTICATION OR IDENTIFICATION

* * *

(b) Examples. The following are examples only--not a complete list--of evidence that satisfies the requirement:

(1) Testimony of a Witness with Knowledge. Testimony that an item is what it is claimed to be.

(2) Nonexpert Opinion About Handwriting. A nonexpert's opinion that handwriting is genuine, based on a familiarity with it that was not acquired for the current litigation.

(3) Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of Fact. A comparison with an authenticated specimen by an expert witness or the trier of fact.

(4) Distinctive Characteristics and the Like. The appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all the circumstances.

(5) Opinion About a Voice. An 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.

(6) Evidence About a Telephone Conversation. For a telephone conversation, evidence that a call was made to the number assigned at the time to:

(A) a particular person, if circumstances, including self-identification, show that the person answering was the one called; or

(B) a particular business, if the call was made to a business and the call related to business reasonably transacted over the telephone.

(7) Evidence About Public Records. Evidence that:

(A) a document was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law; or

(B) a purported public record or statement is from the office where items of this kind are kept.

(8) Evidence About Ancient Documents or Data Compilations. For a document or data compilation, evidence that it:

(A) is in a condition that creates no suspicion about its authenticity;

(B) was in a place where, if authentic, it would likely be; and

(C) is at least 20 years old when offered.

(9) Evidence About a Process or System. Evidence describing a process or system and showing that it produces an accurate result.

(10) Methods Provided by a Statute or Rule. Any method of authentication or identification allowed by a federal statute or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court.

Rule 902. Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating

The following items of evidence are self-authenticating; they require no extrinsic evidence of authenticity in order to be admitted:

(1) Domestic Public Documents That Are Sealed and Signed. A document that bears:

(A) a seal purporting to be that of the United States; any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States; the former Panama Canal Zone; the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; a political subdivision of any of these entities; or a department, agency, or officer of any entity named above; and

(B) a signature purporting to be an execution or attestation.

(2) Domestic Public Documents That Are Not Sealed but Are Signed and Certified. A document that bears no seal if:

(A) it bears the signature of an officer or employee of an entity named in Rule 902(1)(A); and

(B) another public officer who has a seal and official duties within that same entity certifies under seal--or its equivalent--that the signer has the official capacity and that the signature is genuine.

(3) Foreign Public Documents. A document that purports to be signed or attested by a person who is authorized by a foreign country's law to do so. The document must be accompanied by a final certification that certifies the genuineness of the signature and official position of the signer or attester--or of any foreign official whose certificate of genuineness relates to the signature or attestation or is in a chain of certificates of genuineness relating to the signature or attestation. The certification may be made by a secretary of a United States embassy or legation; by a consul general, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States; or by a diplomatic or consular official of the foreign country assigned or accredited to the United States. If all parties have been given a reasonable opportunity to investigate the document's authenticity and accuracy, the court may, for good cause, either:

(A) order that it be treated as presumptively authentic without final certification; or

(B) allow it to be evidenced by an attested summary with or without final certification.

(4) Certified Copies of Public Records. A copy of an official record--or a copy of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law--if the copy is certified as correct by:

(A) the custodian or another person authorized to make the certification; or

(B) a certificate that complies with Rule 902(1), (2), or (3), a federal statute, or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court.

(5) Official Publications. A book, pamphlet, or other publication purporting to be issued by a public authority.

(6) Newspapers and Periodicals. Printed material purporting to be a newspaper or periodical.

(7) Trade Inscriptions and the Like. An inscription, sign, tag, or label purporting to have been affixed in the course of business and indicating origin, ownership, or control.

(8) Acknowledged Documents. A document accompanied by a certificate of acknowledgment that is lawfully executed by a notary public or another officer who is authorized to take acknowledgments.

(9) Commercial Paper and Related Documents. Commercial paper, a signature on it, and related documents, to the extent allowed by general commercial law.

(10) Presumptions Under a Federal Statute. A signature, document, or anything else that a federal statute declares to be presumptively or prima facie genuine or authentic.

(11) Certified Domestic Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. The original or a copy of a domestic record that meets the requirements of Rule 803(6)(A)-(C), as shown by a certification of the custodian or another qualified person that complies with a federal statute or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court. Before the trial or hearing, the proponent must give an adverse party reasonable written notice of the intent to offer the record--and must make the record and certification available for inspection--so that the party has a fair opportunity to challenge them.

(12) Certified Foreign Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. In a civil case, the
original or a copy of a foreign record that meets the requirements of Rule 902(11), modified as follows: the certification, rather than complying with a federal statute or Supreme Court rule, must be signed in a manner that, if falsely made, would subject the maker to a criminal penalty in the country where the certification is signed. The proponent must also meet the notice requirements of Rule 902(11).

<EN>---

Comparative Note. As under the Code, authentication is a sufficiency issue under Federal Rule 901(a). It is satisfied by "evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is." The methods by which a writing can be authenticated listed in Rule 901(b) are similar to those found in the Code. Rule 901(b), like the Code, provides that the methods enumerated are illustrative, not exclusive.

The federal approach to authentication differs from the Code's in two important respects. First, the requirement of authentication is not limited to writings. By referring to "item" instead of "writing", Rule 901 makes explicit what is implicit in the Code—that the requirement of authentication applies to any tangible object that is offered in evidence. Although no special rules are provided for authenticating chattels, Rule 901(b) gives special attention to voice identification and computer printouts. A voice can be identified by anyone who acquired the necessary knowledge by hearing the voice at any time under circumstances connecting the voice with the alleged speaker. A computer printout can be authenticated by evidence describing the process or system used to produce the result and showing that the process or system produces an accurate result.

Second, unlike the Code, Rule 902 provides for the "self-authentication" of certain writings. If a writing qualifies for self-authentication, no extrinsic evidence of authenticity is required as a condition of admissibility. These writings include domestic public documents under seal, certified copies of public records, acknowledged documents, official publications, newspapers and periodicals, trade inscriptions, and commercial paper.

Instead of self-authentication, the Code uses presumptions to favor the authentication of some writings. As is noted in § 9.01, these presumptions favor the authentication of acknowledged documents, some writings affecting interests in real or personal property, documents bearing official seals, and documents bearing official signatures. In addition, under Code, a book purporting to be printed or published by public authority is presumed to have been so printed or published (§ 644); a book purporting to contain reports of cases adjudged in the tribunals of the state or nation where the book is published is presumed to contain correct reports of those cases (§ 645); and printed materials purporting to be a particular newspaper or periodical are presumed to be that newspaper or periodical if regularly issued at average intervals not exceeding three months (§ 645.1). These presumptions do not shift the burden of persuasion with regard to the existence of the presumed fact. If the opponent introduces some evidence contesting the authenticity of the book or periodical, the proponent must convince the fact finder of the document's authenticity by the appropriate persuasion standard without the aid of the presumption (§ 630).

Substantial overlap characterizes the Code's and the Rules' approaches to authentication. Except for the Rules' provision on self-identification, most differences appear to be the product of drafting choices and do not raise significant policy concerns.