## Facts

- The United States brought a federal criminal prosecution against Stanley S. Labovitz in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
- Anticipating the use of numerous documents at trial, the government filed a motion asking the court to permit a “paperless trial.”
- Under the government’s proposal, documentary exhibits would be handled and displayed primarily through an electronic system (digital images shown to the jury and witnesses), rather than by distributing paper copies of each exhibit in open court.
- The motion raised practical and procedural questions about how counsel, witnesses, and jurors would view and work with exhibits; how objections and rulings would be handled in real time; and how the official trial record would reflect what the jury actually saw.
- Judge Ponsor resolved the government’s request as part of pretrial/trial administration in the District of Massachusetts.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court may authorize the government to present documentary evidence at a criminal jury trial through a largely paperless, electronic display and retrieval system.
2. What conditions are required so that the use of electronic exhibit presentation does not impair the defendant’s ability to review evidence, object, cross-examine, and obtain a reviewable record.

## Decision

- The court granted the government’s motion to conduct a paperless trial in the sense that it allowed electronic display and management of documentary exhibits as the primary method of presentation.
- The court required procedures to ensure the defendant could meaningfully see, use, and challenge the exhibits during trial.
- The court required procedures to ensure the record and admitted exhibits were clearly identified and preserved notwithstanding electronic display.
- The court contemplated practical fallback measures so that trial could continue fairly if technology problems arose.

## Legal Principles

- Trial courts have broad discretion to regulate courtroom procedure and the mode and order of presenting evidence, including authorizing the use of courtroom technology.
- Electronic display of documents is a method of presentation; it does not change the foundational requirements for admissibility or the parties’ obligations under the federal rules governing evidence and criminal procedure.
- Any technology-based presentation must still allow the defense timely access to the same materials the jury sees and a fair opportunity to object and cross-examine using the exhibits.
- The court must ensure that exhibits shown electronically are properly marked, identified, and maintained so that the trial record accurately reflects what was admitted and what was shown to the jury.

## Conclusion

United States v. Labovitz, 1996 WL 417113 (D. Mass. 1996), addresses the government’s request to try a document-heavy criminal case using a largely paperless, electronic exhibit system. The district court permitted electronic presentation, while requiring safeguards aimed at protecting the defendant’s ability to examine and challenge the evidence and ensuring that the admitted exhibits and trial record remained clear and preservable for later review.


United States v. Labovitz, 1996 WL 417113 (1996)