NEW YORK, NY – Earlier this week, Scrutinize released an analysis of New York’s discovery reform law, asserting case dismissals resulting from the law were largely driven by prosecutorial failures, rather than technicalities.
The discovery reform law, passed in 2020, aims “to make the criminal legal system fairer by ensuring prosecutors disclose evidence to the defense in a timely manner,” wrote Scrutinize.
Critics of this law push the narrative that it leads to case dismissals over minor technicalities, but Scrutinize’s analysis of 300 unpublished judicial discovery decisions suggests otherwise.
According to Scrutinize, New York judges are dismissing cases due to prosecutorial failures. These prosecutors “regularly fail to meet basic evidentiary obligations,” citing withholding of evidence or false certifications of compliance, Scrutinize argues.
The analysis published by Scrutinize utilizes a facts sheet the organization created, compiling quotes from unpublished decisions in which New York judges detail prosecutorial failures.
“Even more troubling is that after defense counsel specifically asked the (state) for these records, the (prosecution) outright refused to try and obtain them. Obstinance is not due diligence and is certainly not in keeping with the legislative intent or spirit of discovery compliance,” wrote a Richmond County judge, listed in the Scrutinize database.
Another judge, from Kings County, wrote, “Additionally, the record reveals a pattern of the prior assigned ADA making representations that discovery items did not exist when the items were deemed in the (state’s) possession and did in fact exist,” according to the Scrutinize database.
These and the rest of the 300 judicial quotes demonstrate prosecutorial failures, effectively debunking critics’ narrative that reform is the problem, reported Scrutinize.
However, notes Scrutinize, these do not offer a comprehensive view of all discovery decisions, as 94 to 99.5 percent of New York judicial decisions go unpublished.
“It is possible that other cases paint a different picture—but that picture remains hidden from public view,” Scrutinize held in their analysis, add this “forces the public and legislators to rely on ‘selective narratives,’” rather than the reality of court rulings, Scrutinize argues.
Last month, a bill introduced to the New York State Senate by Deputy Majority Leader Michael Gianaris aims to address this lack of transparency by making full criminal court decisions accessible to the public, according to Scrutinize.
