- 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