Colo. R. Evid. 1003
A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.
(Federal Rule Identical.)
CRE 1003
Committee Comment
The Committee notes the desirability of requiring, in pretrial procedures, that any genuine questions as to the authenticity of the original, or of circumstances that it would be unfair to admit the duplicate, be raised, so that the offering party may take appropriate steps under Rule 1004 to obtain the original.
Annotation Law reviews. For article, "Admissibility of Imaging Systems", see 25 Colo. Law. 61 (September 1996). For article, "The Admissibility of Secondary Evidence: C.R.E. 1003 and 1004 ", see 31 Colo. Law. 77 (May 2002). Duplicates admitted in lieu of originals. Where the defendants were in possession of the copies for more than eight months prior to the trial and knew at that time that the originals were in the hands of third parties, it was proper for the court to admit the duplicates in lieu of the originals. Fasso v. Straten, 640 P.2d 272 (Colo. App. 1982). When altered duplicates admissible. If alterations in the duplicates and/or the originals of otherwise admissible documents have been made, such documents are still admissible provided a full and satisfactory explanation of such alterations is made prior to their admission. People v. Wolfe, 662 P.2d 502 (Colo. App. 1983). If the content of a videotape has not been altered, playing the tape at real-time speed, or in an enhanced or enlarged form that does not alter the original images, is generally permissible. People v. Armijo, 179 P.3d 134 (Colo. App. 2007). Where there is no evidence of a discrepancy between the original and the duplicate, the unsupported supposition that the original may have been altered will not prevent introduction of the duplicate. Equico Lessors, Inc. v. Tak's Automotive Serv., 680 P.2d 854 (Colo. App. 1984). Where defendant did not object to use of photocopy, its use did not so undermine the fundamental fairness of trial as to cast serious doubt on the reliability of conviction. People v. Chavez, 764 P.2d 371 (Colo. App. 1988). While this rule and C.R.E. 1004 may allow for admission of a duplicate will into evidence in lieu of the original, in the case of a lost or missing will, the standards specified in § 15-12-402 will control whether the will can be admitted to probate. In re Estate of Perry, 33 P.3d 1235 (Colo. App. 2001).