Gilbert Lundstrom (defendant) ran a bank that was shut down by federal regulators. Lundstrom was charged with crimes, including fraudulent concealment of the bank’s loan losses. At Lundstrom’s trial, the United States (plaintiff) introduced into evidence reports written by examiners from the federal Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS). OTS examiners regularly supervise banks to make sure that they are complying with applicable laws and regulations, and the examiners’ reports were prepared as part of OTS’s regular work. The district court admitted the examiners’ reports into evidence under the business-records exception to the hearsay rule. Lundstrom was convicted of fraudulently concealing the bank’s losses, and he appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. On appeal, Lundstrom challenged the district court’s decision to admit the examiners’ reports. Lundstrom asserted that under the public-records exception to the hearsay rule, a report containing factual findings from a legally authorized investigation is inadmissible when offered against a criminal defendant. Lundstrom claimed that because the reports were inadmissible as public records, the court should not have admitted them as business records.