Criminal Justice Discovery Reform: More Reforming than Meets the Eye
What impact has discovery had on speedy trial? Certificates of compliance have caused statements of readiness and corresponding defense obligations to be scrutinized more closely than ever before. What actions or lack thereof make a statement of readiness truly illusory? Prosecutors work within stricter time frames and receive less leniency on failing to comply with them, resulting in what many believe are dismissals based on “technicalities.”
January 13, 2025 at 08:00 AM
3 minute read
The Criminal Justice Section has been instrumental in advocating changes in criminal law and in shaping criminal practice. Our membership of judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys, including private, institutional, and 18B practitioners, celebrated the passage of changes to Bail and Discovery laws in 2020. Since then, media coverage of select extreme and emotionally sensitive cases have caused a public outcry for a return to the way that things used to be. Knowing that these few outlying examples may exaggerate or misrepresent the overall trend in criminal justice reform, the Criminal Justice Section continues to examine the bigger picture and reviews how criminal practice evolves by these changes.
Now several years later, discovery continues to be a hot topic. What impact has discovery had on speedy trial? Certificates of compliance have caused statements of readiness and corresponding defense obligations to be scrutinized more closely than ever before. What actions or lack thereof make a statement of readiness truly illusory? Prosecutors work within stricter time frames and receive less leniency on failing to comply with them, resulting in what many believe are dismissals based on “technicalities.” What obligations do parties have to alert each other to missing materials, and what is the remedy for failing to follow through? How do courts weigh prejudice to either party in determining issues of disclosure? Pretrial preparedness on either side can make or break a case before the delivery of opening statements. Is dismissal a proper remedy or are there other more appropriate ways to address the parties’ needs? We have grappled with arguments about these issues and many more.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLuigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
4 minute readTikTok’s ‘Blackout Challenge’ Confronts the Limits of CDA Section 230 Immunity
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Bar Report - Jan. 13
- 2Newsmakers: Robert Collins, Barron Wallace Elected to Bracewell’s Management Committee
- 3Navigating the Shifting Sands of E-Discovery and Information Governance in 2025
- 4A Plan for Coordinating State Action on Environmental Protection as the Federal Government Rolls Back National Efforts
- 5Alston & Bird, Eversheds Sutherland Ranked Among Top Firms Globally for M&A Deals in 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250