7.3 Physical and Electronic Exhibits and Chain of Custody

Marked is not admitted

An exhibit can be marked for identification, offered, admitted, excluded, withdrawn, or retained subject to another status. The presiding official decides admissibility. The reporter records or tracks the stated status but does not label an exhibit “admitted” merely because counsel handed it over. Use the numbering or lettering scheme designated by the court, arbitration, deposition agreement, or agency.

Before the proceeding, learn who assigns identifiers, who applies labels, whether parties premark, how confidential items are designated, and who holds originals. Avoid duplicate identifiers by maintaining a live index. Correct a marking error openly under the authorized procedure; do not peel labels or rename files secretly.

Physical exhibits

When receiving a physical item:

1. Confirm the exhibit identifier and case.
2. Describe only what the procedure requires, avoiding unsupported conclusions.
3. Apply or verify the approved label without obscuring content.
4. Note source, time, status, and any seal or confidentiality restriction.
5. Maintain secure custody and prevent alteration, contamination, or loss.
6. Transfer or return it only to an authorized person with a receipt or log.

Unusual evidence—currency, weapons, biological material, controlled substances, bulky objects—may require law-enforcement or clerk custody. Do not personally handle an unsafe item merely because someone calls it an exhibit. Seek direction.

Electronic exhibits

Electronic exhibits may arrive as documents, images, spreadsheets, audio, video, native files, links, or screen shares. A screen display is not necessarily the authoritative file. Confirm the submitted version, filename, identifier, and custody method. Preserve native format and metadata when required; avoid opening a file in software that automatically alters it. Scan or quarantine according to approved security procedures without destroying evidentiary data.

For a large file or cloud link, document what was received and when. A later-changing link is poor custody unless the system preserves a fixed version. An integrity hash can help show whether a particular byte sequence changed, but it does not prove authorship, legal admissibility, or that the source was trustworthy.

Chain of custody

A chain of custody is the documented sequence of possession, control, transfer, and disposition. A useful entry includes:

The same principles apply to the reporter's recording and job information. Keep master, working copy, and released derivative distinguishable. Do not overwrite the master when making an excerpt or format conversion.

Managing during the proceeding

Log each marked exhibit and status change at the correct point. If counsel uses an exhibit before marking, follow the presiding official's direction. If two electronic files share a name, stop the ambiguity before transfer. For confidential exhibits, apply the required designation and limit access; do not place the protected label only in a private note that other custodians cannot see.

If the reporter does not retain exhibits, the case information should still state who did. If the reporter retains them for transcript work, define the authorized period and secure return path. Never take an exhibit home casually or use its content for training.

Submission and discrepancy

At close, reconcile the live index with labels and files. Identify missing, duplicate, withdrawn, or retained items. Prepare the authorized receipt, upload, or handoff. If an exhibit cannot be located, preserve logs and report immediately; do not substitute a similar copy without authorization.

A strong exam answer protects identity, status, custody, and authority. Speed is secondary to preventing a mislabeled or untraceable item from entering the record.

Exam application

At close, the index shows Exhibits 4, 5, and 7, while two different files are both labeled Exhibit 6. Do not choose one, rename the other silently, or create an Exhibit 8 to make the sequence tidy. Preserve both items and their receipt facts, compare live notes, and obtain an authorized correction. The final handoff should make identifier, version, status, custodian, and transfer traceable. This protects the record even when the original marking mistake cannot be erased from what participants said.

Why custody carries evidentiary weight

Chain of custody is not clerical housekeeping; it supports authentication. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 901(a), the proponent of an item must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims. Rule 901(b) lists illustrations, including testimony of a witness with knowledge and — directly relevant to digital reporting — an opinion identifying a person's voice based on hearing it under circumstances connecting it with the alleged speaker. A custody log showing who held an item, when, and in what condition is how that showing gets made months later by someone who was never in the room.

The evidence rules also explain why version control matters for electronic exhibits. Rule 1001 defines an original of a recording as the recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it, and for electronically stored information as any printout or other output readable by sight that accurately reflects the information. A duplicate is a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic, or equivalent process that accurately reproduces the original. Rule 1003 admits a duplicate to the same extent as an original unless a genuine question is raised about authenticity or fairness. A careless conversion that strips metadata, resamples audio, or re-encodes video invites exactly that question.

What a usable log entry looks like

A custody entry should read as a complete statement of fact:

EX-6 (native .xlsx, 412 KB, hash ending 9c4f) received from Atty. Ruiz 10:42 a.m., marked for identification, retained by reporter, transferred to clerk 4:15 p.m., receipt 2291.

Compare that with "got Ex 6 from lawyer." The first survives a challenge without the reporter's testimony; the second depends entirely on memory and is the version that fails a year later.