South Dakota § 19-19-901 Authenticating or identifying evidence.

South Dakota Statutes

§ 19-19-901 — Authenticating or identifying evidence.

South Dakota § 19-19-901

Title 19EVIDENCE

Ch. 19-18SOUTH DAKOTA RULES OF EVIDENCE

This text of South Dakota § 19-19-901 (Authenticating or identifying evidence.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering South Dakota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

S.D. Codified Laws § 19-19-901 (2026).

Text

(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.

(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. Th

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(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. (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 state statute or a rule prescribed by the Supreme Court.