Appeals court weighs lay‑witness identification and cell‑site evidence in Commonwealth v. Harris

Good morning. An appellate panel heard oral argument in Commonwealth v. Harris (24‑P‑570) over whether a trial judge properly admitted a lay witness’s identification from surveillance video and whether cell‑site location information (CSLI) should have been considered.

The question centered on whether Douglas Hine had sufficient familiarity with the defendant to offer an opinion that the person depicted in masked and hooded surveillance footage was the defendant, and whether CSLI admitted below had probative value given its timing.

Why it matters: The court addressed the threshold used to admit lay identification testimony when a suspect’s face is obscured and the growing use of CSLI in criminal cases — issues that can affect both reliability of identifications and privacy concerns about location data.

Kevin de Mello, defense counsel for Mr. Harris, argued that the lay witness was “no better suited than the fact finder” because Hine worked with the…