Improper Admission of a Rap Song Through an Unqualified Witness Deprived Client of a Fair Trial
Prior to trial, the prosecution sought to admit a rap song that Mr. Reaves performed over recorded telephone calls while incarcerated at Rikers Island. The prosecution claimed it was an “admission” and a “statement of prior knowledge.” Over objection, the court ruled that the rap song was admissible if the prosecution was able to call a witness who was qualified in slang to interpret the lyrics.
The following morning, the prosecution informed the court it had no expert witness available to testify. When the court stated the prosecution had ten minutes to “get somebody” to be their expert, the prosecution produced an investigator who worked in the Special Investigations Unit at the Kings County District Attorney’s Office. Although this investigator had never before been qualified as an expert in “street lingo,” and despite defense counsel’s objection that the investigator lacked the requisite experience and that the jury would automatically accept his interpretation of the rap lyrics, the court qualified the investigator as an expert in the field of slang. The investigator subsequently testified and provided a line-by-line interpretation of what he believed the lyrics meant. His testimony mirrored the prosecution’s theory of the case. Mr. Reaves was convicted of second-degree criminal facilitation.
The Second Department reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial, concluding that Mr. Reaves was deprived of a fair trial. The Court found that the investigator’s interpretations “were often grounded in admitted speculation, but which ultimately evolved into opinions fitting precisely into the People’s factual theory of the case.” The Court also determined that the prosecution failed to establish that the witness was qualified to render an expert opinion as to the meaning of rap lyrics. In addition, the testimony caused further error by describing prior bad acts and uncharged crimes, which was exacerbated by the prosecutor’s summation that adopted this interpretation of the lyrics.
David Fitzmaurice and Jenner & Block LLP (pro bono counsel) represented Mr. Reaves