## Facts

- The government prosecuted Robert Andrew Blechman and codefendant Itsik (“Issac”) Yass for mail fraud and conspiracy arising from a foreclosure-rescue scheme using sham bankruptcy filings to trigger the Bankruptcy Code’s automatic stay.
- The government alleged Blechman assisted Yass by helping create and support fraudulent bankruptcy cases used to delay foreclosure sales.
- Trial evidence included emails sent from “rablechman@aol.com” to Yass, evidence of PACER access to bankruptcy cases, postal money orders Blechman filled out and mailed to bankruptcy courts for filing fees, and Yass’s testimony describing Blechman’s role.
- A jury convicted Blechman on mail fraud, conspiracy, and aggravated identity theft; the district court later entered a judgment of acquittal on the identity-theft counts and sentenced Blechman to 18 months on the remaining counts.
- On appeal, Blechman challenged only the admission of an AOL “Member Information” record and three PACER billing records, arguing they were hearsay and double hearsay improperly admitted as business records under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6).
- The AOL record was offered to connect Blechman to the “rablechman@aol.com” address; the PACER records were offered to show that Blechman accessed bankruptcy cases using PACER accounts.

## Issues

1. Whether the AOL subscriber record and PACER billing records were improperly admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6) because they contained unverified user-supplied or third-party assertions constituting double hearsay.
2. If admission was erroneous, whether the error was harmless given other properly admitted evidence of Blechman’s participation in the fraud scheme.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit held the district court erred by admitting the AOL and PACER records under Rule 803(6) to prove the truth of embedded, outsider-supplied identifying information.
- The court concluded the error was harmless because properly admitted evidence overwhelmingly established Blechman’s involvement, and the challenged records did not substantially influence the verdict.
- The court affirmed Blechman’s convictions on the remaining counts.

## Legal Principles

- Rule 803(6) can admit records of a regularly conducted activity, but it does not automatically make admissible all statements contained within a record.
- When a business record includes statements from an outsider (such as customer-entered account information), that additional hearsay layer must independently qualify as non-hearsay or fall within a hearsay exception.
- For electronic records, courts must distinguish between system-generated/record-keeping components and factual assertions supplied by users or third parties; the latter require a showing of reliability or independent admissibility.
- Non-constitutional evidentiary error is harmless if it did not have a substantial influence on the verdict and does not leave grave doubt about the verdict’s correctness.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit ruled that AOL and PACER documents containing unverified, user-supplied identifying information were not admissible for their truth under Rule 803(6) without an independent basis to admit the embedded statements, but affirmed because overwhelming independent evidence tied Blechman to the fraud conspiracy.


United States v. Blechman, 657 F.3d 1052 (10th Cir. 2011)