Permits corrective remedies, including but not limited to, preclusion, reversal or modification for violations of certain discovery rules in criminal proceedings only when substantial rights of the party are affected and such remedies shall be available only to the extent to correct prejudice caused by the violation.
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A7356
SPONSOR: Oaks (MS) TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to corrective
remedies
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
To require that a criminal defendant demonstrate a substantial right has
been affected before he/she is entitled to any corrective remedy for a
discovery violation by the prosecutor.
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
This bill enacts a new Section 240.46 in the Criminal Procedure Law that
provides that no remedy of preclusion, reversal or modification of a
judgment shall be granted to a criminal defendant due to a violation of
the pre-trial and trial discovery provisions (CPL § 240.44, 240.45)
unless the defendant demonstrates a substantial right has been affected.
EFFECTS OF THIS BILL ON PRESENT LAW:
Violations of the so-called ROSARIO rule (People v. Rosario, 9 NY2d 286)
where the People fail to turn over to the defendant certain discovery
material result in a reversal of the conviction and a new trial (People
v. Ranghelle, 69 NY2d 56). As prerequisite to a reversal and a new
trial, this bill would require that a defendant seeking the remedy
demonstrate prejudice.
JUSTIFICATION:
This bill balances the need of a criminal defendant to obtain discovery
material with the practicality of running a prosecutor's office. If
ROSARIO material is inadvertently not turned over, a defendant should
have to demonstrate that this somehow prejudiced his case before he or
she receives a reversal and a new trial. Automatic reversals are drastic
remedies and are costly both as to prosecutor's time and court
congestion. This bill constitutes a corrective measure, striking a
balance among the various interests.
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
2002 Held for consideration in codes (A4263)
2003-04 Held for consideration in Codes (A3979)
2005-06 Held for consideration in Codes (A4666)
2007-08 Held for consideration in Codes (A3719)
2009-10 Held for consideration in Codes (55969)
2011-12 Held for consideration in Codes (A.5116)
2013-14 Held for consideration in Codes (A6621)
2015-16 Held for consideration in Codes (A5831)
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None
EFFECTIVE DATE:
November 1 after it shall have been enacted.
