Maine will let a certificate replace the witness for electronic evidence on November 1

Maine will add Rules 902(13) and 902(14) to its Rules of Evidence on November 1, 2026. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court adopted the change in an order dated October 8, 2026, signed by Chief Justice Valerie Stanfill with all justices concurring.

The new subdivisions expand Rule 902, which lists evidence that requires no extrinsic evidence of authenticity. Before the amendment, Maine Rule 902 contained subdivisions (1) through (12). The new provisions address electronic records generated by a system and data copied from electronic devices, storage media, or files.

The court posted the proposed amendments for comment on September 8, 2026. Comments were due by email to the Executive Clerk by 4:00 p.m. on September 29.

Before publication, the Archivar desk read the four-page order and compared the new Maine text with Federal Rules of Evidence 902(13) and 902(14). The operative wording of both Maine subdivisions matches the federal text. The Advisory Note repeats largely the same paragraphs on cost, notice, and limits for both provisions. Its explanation of hash values appears only under Rule 902(14).

Rule 902(13) covers records produced by electronic systems

Rule 902(13) applies to a record generated by an electronic process or system that produces an accurate result. A qualified person must certify that the record satisfies the rule's requirements. The certification must comply with the certification requirements of Rule 902(11) or Rule 902(12), and the proponent must meet Rule 902(11)'s notice requirements.

The amendment does not list particular examples. Commentary on the federal rule has identified records such as Windows registry data showing that a USB device was connected to a computer, web server logs showing access from particular Internet Protocol addresses, and GPS coordinates and timestamps stored with photographs taken by a phone.

Those examples involve information generated or stored through a system rather than testimony from a person who directly observed the underlying event. Under the new Maine rule, a qualified person's certification can address the authenticity of that system-generated record without requiring the person to appear as a foundation witness, if the certification would establish authenticity as live testimony.

The Advisory Note says the Maine language tracks Federal Rule of Evidence 902(13), which took effect on December 1, 2017. It also says the federal policy considerations apply with equal force in Maine and points to the federal Advisory Committee Notes as instructive.

Rule 902(14) addresses copied device data and hash values

Rule 902(14) applies to data copied from an electronic device, storage medium, or file. A qualified person must authenticate the data through a process of digital identification and provide a certification that complies with Rule 902(11) or Rule 902(12). The proponent must also satisfy Rule 902(11)'s notice requirements.

The Advisory Note focuses on hash values. A hash value is a number, often displayed as a string of characters, produced by an algorithm from the digital contents of a drive, storage medium, or file.

Different hash values show that the copy is not identical to the original. Matching hash values make it highly improbable that the copy and original differ. The rule permits a qualified person to certify that the person checked the hash value of the offered item and confirmed that it matched the original.

The rule is not limited to hash values. The Advisory Note says it is flexible enough to allow other reliable identification methods, including methods supplied by future technology.

The certification proves authenticity, not admissibility on every ground

The cross-reference to Rule 902(11) or Rule 902(12) concerns the procedural requirements for a valid certification. It does not require or permit the certification to establish the business-record requirements of Rule 803(6).

A proponent must satisfy any hearsay exception independently. The certification establishes authenticity only. An opposing party may still object on hearsay, relevance, or other grounds. In a criminal case, the right to confrontation remains a separate issue.

The certification must contain information sufficient to establish authenticity if a witness gave the same information at trial. If a live witness's testimony would be insufficient, the certification cannot establish authenticity under the new rule.

An authenticity challenge may require technical information about the relevant system or process. The Advisory Note says that may include retaining a forensic technical expert. Those considerations bear on whether the opposing party received a fair opportunity to challenge the evidence in light of the notice provided.

Notice must come before the trial or hearing

Rule 902(11), which both new subdivisions incorporate, requires the proponent to give the adverse party reasonable written notice before trial or hearing of the intent to offer the record. The proponent must also make the record and certification available for inspection.

The purpose is to give the opposing party a fair opportunity to challenge authenticity. That opportunity can include reviewing the system or copying process and deciding whether technical assistance is needed.

Rule 902(12) concerns certified foreign records in civil cases. Its certification must be signed in a manner that would subject the maker to criminal punishment in the country where it is signed if the certification were false. The new subdivisions use Rule 902(12) as an alternative source for certification requirements, while Rule 902(11) supplies the notice requirement.

The Advisory Note says the amendment addresses the time, expense, and inconvenience of producing an authentication witness. A party may pay to bring such a witness to court, only for the opposing party to stipulate before the testimony begins or decline to challenge the testimony. The new procedure gives the parties a way to determine before trial whether a real authenticity dispute exists.

What changes in practice

From November 1, 2026, a party offering system logs or a forensic copy of a phone or drive in Maine state court can use a written certification from a qualified person instead of calling a foundation witness, if the certification would suffice as live testimony.

The Advisory Note ties the fairness of the opponent's chance to challenge the evidence, including time to hire a forensic expert, to the notice provided.

Authentication also remains only the first hurdle. Counsel must separately address hearsay, relevance, and, in criminal cases, confrontation. The certification cannot establish the business-record exception.

Maine's wording matches the federal rules, and the Advisory Note directs courts to the federal Advisory Committee Notes. Lawyers practicing in both federal court and Maine state court will see the same operative text.

Archivar is an operating system for a law firm that answers every call 24/7 in English and Spanish, runs intake, manages matters, and remembers everything the firm does. Under the new subdivisions, the dates notice went out and the record and certification became available for inspection become part of the matter record a firm keeps.

The amendments take effect November 1, 2026.