New Trial Ordered for State's Discovery Violation

This Mississippi Court of Appeals ordered a new trial for a man in state court.  Judge Wilson, authored the opinion, beginning:

"On appeal, White raises eight issues.  We conclude that White is entitled to a new trial based on his first issue: a clear discovery violation by the State followed by the denial of White's request for a mistrial or continuance.  Just prior to opening statements, the district attorney disclosed that the State possessed approximately ninety-five minutes of recorded phone conversations involving White, and the State intended to introduce unspecified parts of the recordings, including an alleged 'confession,' into evidence at trial.  The recordings had been in the State's possession for two years, but despite a specific discovery request by White, the State had failed to disclose their existence.  The trial judge delayed opening statements just long enough for White's attorney to listen to the recordings but denied White's request for a continuance or mistrial.  Given the State's clear violation of the rules of discovery and the importance of the evidence, we conclude that the denial of a continuance or mistrial was an abuse of discretion, that the error was not harmless, and that White is entitled to a new trial."

The entire opinion is here.  The Clarion Ledger also wrote an article covering the case.

Prior to July 1, 2017, Rule 9.04 of the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court covered discovery in criminal cases in Mississippi State Courts.  After July 1, 2017, Rule 17 of the recently enacted Mississippi Rules of Criminal Procedures now applies to discovery in state court criminal cases. United States Supreme Court precedent, such as Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) pertaining to the prosecution's duty to disclose exculpatory and impeachment evidence to a defendant in a criminal case, also apply in state court.