Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 910 — EVIDENCE — CONTENTS OF WRITINGS, RECORDINGS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 910.03 (2026)

Admissibility of duplicates

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
910.03910.03 Admissibility of duplicates. 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. No duplicate is inadmissible solely because it is in electronic format.
910.03 HistoryHistory: Sup. Ct. Order, 59 Wis. 2d R1, R356 (1973); 2003 a. 294.
910.03 AnnotationPhotostatic copies of hospital records were admissible under this section. Schulz v. St. Mary’s Hospital, 81 Wis. 2d 638, 260 N.W.2d 783 (1978).
910.03 AnnotationEven if screen shots of text messages on a cell phone were considered duplicates, there was no “genuine question as to the authenticity of the original” barring their use in this case. Because the defendant never asserted that the screen shots did not accurately depict the content of the messages on the phone, this section did not demand that the state present the messages on the phone itself or some sort of forensic printout. Even if the text messages had been altered, the phone or a printout would not necessarily display a more trustworthy version of the messages than what appeared in the screen shots. State v. Giacomantonio, 2016 WI App 62, 371 Wis. 2d 452, 885 N.W.2d 394, 15-0968.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2023 · leading case: State v. Saunders, 2002 WI 107 (Wis. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Saunders, 2002 WI 107 (Wis. 2002). · cites it 16× “[18] In oral argument the State offered another rule of evidence, Wis. Stat. § 910.03 , as a possible means to counteract Saunders' argument that the uncertified copy of the judgment of conviction was improperly before the circuit court at sentencing.”
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Thomas P. Wuensch, 911 N.W.2d 1 (Wis. 2018). · cites it 4× “11 We note Wis. Stat. § 910.03 provides that "[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…”
State v. Smith, 2005 WI 104 (Wis. 2005). · cites it 2× “Regardless, Wis. Stat. § 910.03 provides for admission of a duplicate to the same extent as an original unless circumstances, which are not implicated here, are present.”
State v. Anderson, 2005 WI 54 (Wis. 2005). · cites it 2× “1999) (discussing broader legislation that provides that "where an attorney general concludes that an offense was committed somewhere within the state, but `it is impossible to determine in which county it occurred, the offense may be alleged in the indictment to have been…”
State v. Giacomantonio, 2016 WI App 62 (Wis. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “See Wis. Stat. § 910.03 (stating that a duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless there is a genuine question raised as to the original's authenticity).”
State v. Curtis, 582 N.W.2d 409 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Furthermore, the FBI agent who rerecorded the original tapes testified about the procedure used for rerecording in order to enhance intelligibility.”
Schulz v. St. Mary's Hosp., 260 N.W.2d 783 (Wis. 1978). “4 Sec. 910.03, Stats. 5 NOTE: Since this case was tried, the Wisconsin Code of Evidence has been amended to permit the parties to dispense entirely with the testimony of a custodian or other qualified witness as to hospital records, providing that party offering the records…”
Dane Cnty. v. D. F. B. (Wis. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “§ 910.03, 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.”
The Bank of New York Mellon v. Timothy R. Rumpf (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 910.03, titled “Admissibility of duplicates,” provides that “[a] duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original” under certain circumstances.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.