## Facts

- Bill Snow was charged and convicted in federal district court of knowingly possessing an unregistered firearm.
- The firearm was discovered inside a briefcase found on premises Snow frequently visited.
- The briefcase bore a strip of red tape with lettering including “Bill Snow” (and additional business-related wording).
- The government offered the tape/label and the briefcase as circumstantial proof that the briefcase (and thus the firearm) was Snow’s.
- Other evidence linked Snow to the firearm, including Snow’s fingerprint on the weapon and testimony that he had been seen carrying a similar briefcase with a name tag at the same location.
- The defense elicited testimony that the briefcase introduced at trial was not the same briefcase a witness had previously seen in Snow’s possession.
- The trial judge received foundation testimony with the exhibit initially concealed from the jury and admitted the exhibit after finding a sufficient foundation.
- Snow objected that the label was hearsay because it implicitly asserted ownership by Snow and the person who created or placed it was unidentified.

## Issues

1. Whether a name label on a briefcase, offered to show ownership and possession, is inadmissible hearsay as an out-of-court assertion.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by admitting the label and briefcase upon the foundation presented.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the name label was not inadmissible hearsay when used as circumstantial evidence connecting Snow to the briefcase.
- Any possibility that someone else placed the label on the briefcase affected the evidence’s weight, not its admissibility.
- The district court’s handling of foundation and admission did not constitute reversible error.

## Legal Principles

- Evidence is hearsay only if offered as a “statement” (an assertion) for the truth of the matter asserted; not all writings or markings function as testimonial assertions.
- A label, tag, or inscription may be admissible as nonhearsay circumstantial evidence of identity, ownership, or possession when treated as a physical trace linking a person to an object.
- Competing explanations for how an identifying mark came to be on an object generally go to the weight of the evidence for the jury, not exclusion, if the evidence is relevant and a basic foundation is established.
- Trial courts have discretion to manage admissibility through foundational procedures designed to ensure the jury sees the evidence only after an adequate link is shown.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that a briefcase label bearing the defendant’s name was properly admitted as nonhearsay circumstantial evidence of ownership/possession, with questions about who placed the label left for the jury to evaluate, and it therefore affirmed Snow’s unregistered-firearm conviction.


United States v. Snow, 517 F.2d 441 (9th Cir. 1975)