## Facts

- Johnson, Agers, and Richey were major stockholders in Thunderbird Valley Corporation, which sold land lots to purchasers.
- A federal grand jury indicted the defendants for mail fraud arising from an alleged fraudulent land-sale scheme conducted through Thunderbird Valley and related entities.
- At trial, the prosecution relied heavily on Thunderbird Valley’s corporate records to show the scope and operation of the alleged scheme.
- Rather than introduce the voluminous records in full, the government offered a summary compilation prepared by a postal inspector.
- The compilation drew from underlying documents that included hearsay and were not shown to be admissible under any hearsay exception.
- The district court admitted the postal inspector’s summary as evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 1006, and the jury convicted the defendants.

## Issues

1. Whether a summary of voluminous records is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 1006 when the proponent has not shown that the underlying writings or records are themselves admissible.
2. Whether admitting an investigator-prepared summary containing hearsay, as substantive proof central to the prosecution’s case, constitutes reversible evidentiary error.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the defendants’ convictions and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held that the government failed to satisfy the prerequisites for admission of a Rule 1006 summary because it did not establish the admissibility of the underlying records.
- Because the summary incorporated hearsay and was central to the government’s proof, its admission was prejudicial and required reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A Rule 1006 summary is admissible only if the proponent demonstrates that the underlying writings or records summarized are admissible.
- Rule 1006 does not create an exception to the hearsay rule; a summary cannot be used to place inadmissible hearsay before the jury indirectly.
- A summary must reflect only the content of admissible underlying materials and may not function as a substitute for foundational proof.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit required reversal where the prosecution used an investigator’s Rule 1006 summary to present the contents of voluminous corporate records without first establishing that the underlying records were admissible, resulting in prejudicial admission of hearsay as substantive evidence.


United States v. Johnson, 594 F.2d 1253 (9th Cir. 1979)