Framework in Place to Roll Back Some of New York’s Discovery Reform Law
Introduction to the Discovery Reform Law
State Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie said Tuesday that lawmakers have a “framework” in place with Gov. Kathy Hochul to adjust the state’s discovery law, which had emerged as a key sticking point in the passage of New York State’s roughly $250 billion budget.
“I just briefed my conference, and we’re in a good place,” Heastie, who declined to detail the new agreement, told reporters.
Proposed Changes to the Law
He did say that the proposed changes to the discovery reform law passed in 2019 would let judges consider prejudice – the legal term for how much a piece of evidence directly impacts a defendant’s pending criminal case.
The law had required prosecutors to turn over all evidence, including materials many of them argued were redundant or inconsequential, in a timely fashion.
Reaction from Officials
“It sounds like very good news, doesn’t it?” Hochul told reporters later Tuesday during a previous scheduled press conference with Hudson Valley law enforcement officials and elected leaders“pushing to change the discovery laws.”
The reported “framework” comes two weeks after the April 1 deadline for passing a budget. If the governor does sign a budget with changes to New York’s discovery law, it would mark a turning point in a long battle over how prosecutors share information with criminal defendants.
Background on the Discovery Law Battle
Hochul and many district attorneys have pushed to let judges decide how much information must be given to defendants before their cases come to trial — and to make it more difficult for cases to be dismissed if prosecutors fail to turn over information in a timely manner.
“My common sense proposal to streamline New York’s discovery laws will close fatal loopholes that have delayed trials and led to cases being thrown out on minor technicalities, which will ultimately help crack down on recidivism and provide justice for victims,” Hochul said in January as she picked up the issue for a second year after a failed push to pare back the law during last year’s budget talks.
Support and Opposition
This year, Hochul has refused to sign a new state budget that does not include what she has described as common sense amendments to the discovery law.
She’s been supported in that push by perhaps the city’s most prominent, and left-leaning, DAs: Alvin Bragg in Manhattan and Eric Gonzalez in Brooklyn.
Citing domestic violence cases being dismissed, Rev. Al Sharpton has also called for the discovery law to be changed.
Criticism from Public Defenders
On the other side, public defenders and criminal justice advocates contend the discovery law reforms should remain in place. Before 2019, New York’s law “suffered from grave deficiencies” that allowed prosecutors to withhold key information from defendants until right before trial, according to a letter from a group of 15 law professors who wrote to the state legislative leaders urging them to push back on Hochul’s proposed changes.
“Despite claims that the Governor’s proposal would merely amend the 2020 law; by eliminating incentives for police and prosecutors to disclose evidence to the accused and stripping judges of authority to enforce compliance with the law, the proposal would effectively repeal the 2020 reforms and return New York to its shameful Blindfold Era,” the letter said.
Statistics and Arguments
Hochul and the state’s DAs have cited a nearly five-fold increase in the number of criminal cases dismissed on speedy trial grounds since the reform took effect — to 49,974 in 2024 from 10,562 in 2019.
“No one understands the need for commonsense changes to our discovery laws better than victims of crime and our partners in law enforcement who see too many victims being denied justice and too many perpetrators reoffending thanks to loopholes in our laws,” Hochul said Tuesday.
Alternative Proposals
Public defenders, however, contend that the primary culprit for the delayed handover of mandated discovery materials is police departments including the NYPD failing to share key information in a timely manner.
As a result, some state lawmakers are backing a proposal introduced by state Senator and New York City mayoral candidate Zellnor Myrie (D-Brooklyn) and state Assembly member Micah Lasher (D-Manhattan)to force local police to give district attorneys automatic access to some of their internal electronic record systems.
Conclusion
The proposed changes to New York’s discovery law have sparked a heated debate between lawmakers, prosecutors, and public defenders. While some argue that the changes are necessary to prevent cases from being dismissed on minor technicalities, others contend that the reforms are essential to ensuring that defendants receive a fair trial. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for the state’s criminal justice system.
FAQs
- What are the proposed changes to New York’s discovery law?
The proposed changes would allow judges to consider prejudice when determining what evidence to turn over to defendants and make it more difficult for cases to be dismissed if prosecutors fail to turn over information in a timely manner. - Why have public defenders opposed the proposed changes?
Public defenders argue that the discovery law reforms should remain in place, as they ensure that defendants receive all relevant evidence in a timely manner and prevent prosecutors from withholding key information. - What statistics have been cited in support of the proposed changes?
Hochul and the state’s DAs have cited a nearly five-fold increase in the number of criminal cases dismissed on speedy trial grounds since the reform took effect. - What alternative proposals have been introduced?
Some state lawmakers have introduced a proposal to force local police to give district attorneys automatic access to some of their internal electronic record systems, which could help to address the issue of delayed discovery materials.
