You can’t admit what you can’t authenticate. Every document, photograph, screenshot, text message, video clip, and business record must first pass the authentication gate: is it what its proponent says it is? The bar is low, but it is not zero — and modern e-discovery, social-media evidence, and cell-phone extractions have made this a growth area of litigation.

The rule — Rule 901 / § 90.901

The proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims. Read: § 90.901, Fla. Stat. · Fed. R. Evid. 901.

The standard is deliberately generous: evidence sufficient to support a finding, not proof of authenticity. The jury ultimately weighs authenticity; the judge decides only whether a reasonable jury could find the item authentic.

The federal illustrations — FRE 901(b)

• (1) Testimony of a witness with knowledge.
• (2) Non-expert opinion about handwriting familiarity (acquired outside the litigation).
• (3) Comparison by an expert witness or the trier of fact with an authenticated specimen.
• (4) Distinctive characteristics — appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns.
• (5) Opinion identifying a voice.
• (6) Evidence about a telephone conversation.
• (7) Evidence about public records.
• (8) Evidence about ancient documents or data compilations.
• (9) Evidence describing a process or system used to produce a result, showing it produces an accurate result.
• (10) Any method provided by statute or Supreme Court rule.

Self-authentication — Rule 902 / § 90.902

Some items are so inherently reliable that no extrinsic proof of authenticity is required. Read: § 90.902, Fla. Stat. · Fed. R. Evid. 902.

The classic categories

• Domestic public documents that are sealed and signed.
• Domestic public documents that are not sealed but signed and certified.
• Foreign public documents (with treaty-based or reciprocal certification).
• Certified copies of public records.
• Official publications.
• Newspapers and periodicals.
• Trade inscriptions on products (labels, tags, brand markings).
• Acknowledged documents (notarized).
• Commercial paper and related documents.
• Presumptions under a federal statute.
• Certified domestic records of a regularly conducted activity — business records with a records-custodian declaration, no live testimony required.
• Certified foreign records of a regularly conducted activity.

The 2017 electronic-evidence additions — FRE 902(13) and 902(14)

Effective December 1, 2017, the federal rule added two new self-authenticating categories:

• 902(13) — Certified Records Generated by an Electronic Process or System.
• 902(14) — Certified Data Copied from an Electronic Device, Storage Medium, or File (typically hash-verified).

Both require pretrial written notice with a fair opportunity to challenge. Florida has no direct counterpart in Chapter 90; Florida courts authenticate ESI through the § 90.901 framework and case law.

Subscribing witness — Rule 903 / § 90.903

Testimony of a subscribing witness is not necessary to authenticate a writing unless required by the laws of the jurisdiction whose law governs its validity. Read: § 90.903, Fla. Stat. · Fed. R. Evid. 903.

Modern application — social media, texts, e-mails, and screenshots

• Text messages. Testimony of a participant, distinctive content, telecom-record subpoenas, forensic device extractions.
• Social-media posts. Account-owner testimony, distinctive content, IP-address subpoena, forensic imaging. A screenshot alone rarely suffices.
• E-mails. Sender’s admissions, distinctive content, reply-chain context, and in federal court, 902(13) certification.
• Video and audio. Witness with knowledge, or the “silent witness” method (FRE 901(b)(9)).
• Cell-phone extractions and forensic images. The 902(14) certification, backed by hash verification, is the workhorse in federal court.

Interaction with the hearsay rules

Authentication and hearsay are separate hurdles. Authenticating a text message under Rule 901 does not make the message admissible; it only lets it clear the first gate. The next question is whether an applicable hearsay exception lets the substance in.

Practical points from the trial bar

• Do the 902 certification work pretrial. Records-custodian declarations under 902(11) and the 2017 electronic-evidence certifications under 902(13)–(14) require pretrial notice.
• Build authentication into the discovery plan. Records custodians, forensic examiners, and metadata all need to be secured early.
• Chain-of-custody for digital evidence. Preserve device images with hash verification.
• Distinctive-content authentication for text messages. Walk the witness through content only the alleged sender would know.
• Screenshots alone are weak. Get the underlying export or forensic image if authenticity is contested.
• Business records need a foundation witness or a 902(11) certification. Discovery production authenticates the source; it does not satisfy the business-records exception.

Related topics

• Hearsay (§§ 90.801–90.806 / FRE 801–807)
• Privileges (§§ 90.501–90.510 / FRE 501–502)
• Expert Testimony & Daubert (§§ 90.701–90.706 / FRE 701–706)
• Character & Other Acts Evidence (§ 90.404 / FRE 404)
• Best Evidence (§§ 90.951–90.958 / FRE 1001–1008)
• Judicial Notice (§§ 90.201–90.207 / FRE 201)
• Settlement & Compromise (§ 90.408 / FRE 408)
• Rape-Shield / Sex-Offense Evidence (§ 794.022 / FRE 412–415)
• Witness Impeachment (§§ 90.608–90.614 / FRE 607–613)

About this topic guide

Part of The Evidence Code, hosted by John M. Phillips — Board Certified Civil Trial Attorney, past president of the Jacksonville Justice Association, and lead trial counsel in state and federal courts across eight states. Phillips, Hunt & Walker maintains rule-book pages for the Florida Evidence Code (Chapter 90), the Federal Rules of Evidence, and the leading Florida procedural rule sets so that lawyers, paralegals, and litigants can find the authority they need in plain English with the citations that let them verify it.

Referrals welcome. If an authentication fight is coming, contact us here.

Educational summary of Florida and federal evidence law; not legal advice. The current statutory and rule text controls; verify at flsenate.gov and law.cornell.edu before relying.