## Facts

- Richard Allen De Georgia was charged under the Dyer Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2312, for transporting a stolen 1968 Ford Mustang in interstate commerce.
- The Mustang was owned by the Hertz Corporation and had last been recorded as returned in New York on June 30, 1968.
- De Georgia gave a written confession stating he stole the car near John F. Kennedy Airport on or about July 2, 1968, and drove it to Tucson, Arizona.
- The vehicle was found in De Georgia’s possession in Tucson on September 9, 1968.
- At trial, De Georgia claimed he had borrowed the car from a friend; the jury rejected that account.
- The district court admitted (1) De Georgia’s confession and (2) testimony from Hertz security manager Tony Gratta based on Hertz computerized rental records showing no authorized rental, lease, or removal after June 30, 1968.

## Issues

1. Whether De Georgia’s written confession was inadmissible because Miranda warnings were inadequate or the statement was involuntary.
2. Whether Hertz’s computerized rental-record evidence—offered through a security manager’s testimony—was inadmissible hearsay and thus could not corroborate the confession that the car was stolen.
3. Whether the best evidence rule required the government to produce the Hertz records themselves rather than testimony describing what the records showed.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The confession was properly admitted because De Georgia received adequate Miranda warnings and the trial court’s voluntariness finding was supported by the record.
- The Hertz testimony based on computerized rental records was admissible under the business records exception and could corroborate the confession on the “stolen” element.
- The best-evidence argument was not considered because it was not raised by timely objection at trial.

## Legal Principles

- A confession alone cannot establish an essential element of an offense; the element must be corroborated by other admissible evidence.
- Computerized business records kept in the regular course of business may be admitted under the business records exception to the hearsay rule when properly supported by foundational testimony.
- The absence of an entry in regularly kept business records may be admitted to prove the nonoccurrence of an event (e.g., no authorized rental or lease).
- Evidentiary objections not raised in the trial court (including best-evidence objections) are generally forfeited on appeal.

## Conclusion

The court upheld De Georgia’s Dyer Act conviction because his Miranda-compliant confession was voluntary and adequately corroborated by admissible Hertz business-record evidence, including proof from the absence of any computer-record entry that no authorized transaction explained the car’s disappearance.


United States v. De Georgia, 420 F.2d 889 (9th Cir. 1969)