- 11 -
Respondent called former Special Agent Mark Gold (Gold) and
Revenue Agent Andrew Rosenblatt (Rosenblatt) to testify to
establish that the foundation requirements of rule 803(6) of the
Federal Rules of Evidence had been met. Petitioner contends that
their testimony violated rule 702 of the Federal Rules of
Evidence relating to expert testimony.3 We disagree. Neither
Gold nor Rosenblatt testified as experts.
Petitioner contends that Gold and Rosenblatt were not
qualified to provide foundation testimony under rule 803(6) of
the Federal Rules of Evidence because they had no role in
creating or maintaining the records. We disagree. For purposes
of rule 803(6) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, a Federal agent
may be qualified to establish that a taxpayer’s records were kept
in the regular course of business. United States v. Franco, 874
F.2d 1136, 1138-1140 (7th Cir. 1989) (drug enforcement agent);
United States v. Hathaway, 798 F.2d 902, 906 (6th Cir. 1986)
(Federal Bureau of Investigation agent); United States v. Veytia-
Bravo, 603 F.2d 1187, 1191-1192 (5th Cir. 1979) (Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agent).
2(...continued)
profession, occupation, and calling of every kind,
whether or not conducted for profit.
3 Petitioner contends that Rosenblatt’s testimony at the
criminal trial violated Fed. R. Evid 702 for expert testimony.
We need not here consider petitioner’s contentions about his
criminal trial.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011