History

✰PREMIUM
Spotlight: Talking budgets: Understanding discovery reform

May 8, 2025 Jesse Goodman

Image: Kaleb/Adobe Stock

What is discovery and why does it matter?

In criminal law, “discovery” refers to the process by which prosecutors and defense attorneys share evidence before trial. It’s the mechanism that ensures both sides are working from the same set of facts.

In New York, delays or denials in discovery have historically contributed to wrongful convictions and prolonged pretrial detention. Before 2019, during a period known as “blindfold law,” defense attorneys often worked with little or no access to critical exculpatory evidence until just before the trial began.

Without timely and complete access to evidence, defense attorneys cannot fully challenge the prosecution’s case or advise their clients. Delays in discovery can incentivize defendants to take plea deals even when innocent, just to avoid sitting in jail. Defendants who refuse to take a plea may spend years in detention while their attorneys argue over discovery.

Moreover, discovery is crucial for holding prosecutors and police accountable. When evidence is withheld, either intentionally or through bureaucratic dysfunction, defendants are left in the dark, and the justice system loses credibility.

One of the incidents that helped catalyze discovery reform is the case of Kalief Browder, a 16-year-old from the Bronx who was accused of stealing a backpack. Browder ended up spending three years at Rikers Island, two of them in solitary confinement, in large part because the prosecution repeatedly delayed turning over key evidence, and Browder refused to take a plea deal.

Eventually, the charges were dropped due to lack of evidence, but Browder emerged from his stay on Rikers traumatized and emotionally battered. Browder died by suicide in 2015 after his release, and his case became a national symbol of the harm caused by discovery delays and pretrial incarceration without bail.

How did New York do things before?

For decades, New York had some of the most opaque discovery rules in the country. Prosecutors weren’t required to hand over key evidence until just before trial.

That changed in 2019, following years of advocacy from criminal justice reformers and renewed public outcry after the death of Kalief Browder. The state passed sweeping reforms requiring prosecutors to turn over most evidence within 20 days of arraignment if a defendant is jailed, and within 35 days if a defendant is free. The law also introduced specific timelines for plea offers and grand jury proceedings.

The legislation was hailed as a landmark step toward due process and transparency.

But resistance came swiftly. District attorneys across the state argued the reforms imposed unrealistic deadlines and administrative burdens, especially for complex cases. A 2023 report from the Manhattan Institute found that some prosecutors were dropping low-level charges outright to avoid the headache of the new discovery laws, leading to a marked drop in convictions and a steady exodus of prosecutors from law offices. In other instances, defense attorneys reported that prosecutors were overloading them with irrelevant data to technically comply with the law.

Rather than leveling the playing field, opponents argued, the strict discovery reforms were strangling due process by imposing untenable compliance mandates. The 2023 Manhattan Institute study wrote, “the new discovery obligations are indeed so herculean that NYS prosecutors have been able to meet them within the mandated time frames on only 21% of cases. In statewide local courts, they are met on 16% of cases, and in NYC local courts, that number dwindles to 13%.” All this leads to more case dismissals, often on the basis of administrative details rather than the merit of the case

However, this assertion has been disputed by a number of other reports, including a 2025 study from Data Collaborative for Justice that found very little evidence of a correlation between discovery laws and case dismissals throughout the state. Michael Rempel, director of the Data Collaborative for Justice at John Jay College, acknowledges that dismissals have risen since 2019, but chalks that up to NYPD delays and a rise in total cases.

What’s changed?

Hochul started championing discovery reforms during the 2024 budget meetings, but was unable to convince her constituents. This time around, the governor made it clear she would not settle on the issue, allowing April’s budget negotiations to drag on a month past the deadline in order to accomplish the necessary revisions. Backed by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and Brooklyn DA Eric Gonzalez — two of the city’s most prominent progressive prosecutors — Hochul ultimately succeeded.

Under the 2025 budgetary framework, judges will decide how much information must be handed over to the defendant before trial, and reduce the list of evidence prosecutors are required to share. Hochul argued that the changes strike a balance between protecting defendants’ rights and preventing unnecessary dismissals.

“Our amendments will prevent cases from being dismissed over minor prosecution omissions that don’t actually hurt the defense’s case,” Hochul said in an announcement. “These common-sense changes protect defendants’ rights, which is important to me, while ensuring that victims get the justice they deserve.”

Hochul and her allies have repeatedly cited domestic violence cases to illustrate the pitfalls of strict discovery mandates. On her website, Hochul references a study that shows a 26% rise in domestic violence case dismissals in New York City since 2019, when the discovery reforms were first implemented, and a nearly 50% increase statewide.

Prominent opponents of the governor’s reforms, including the Legal Aid Society and New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, counter that without strict discovery laws, New York will return to the “blindfold law” of pre-2019, when defendants were disadvantaged by the non-disclosure of the evidence against them.

These opponents contend that any rise in case dismissals is due to NYPD delays, not the law itself. “When explaining delays in court, prosecutors regularly report that officers won’t return their calls, won’t respond to emails, and won’t identify evidence that exists,” the Legal Aid Society wrote in a March 24 memo.

Responding to Hochul’s focus on domestic violence, the group added, “There is no evidence that thousands of domestic violence cases have been dismissed based on ‘technicalities.’ The Governor relies on cherry picked anecdotes, without documentation from cases where the NYPD failed to comply with the discovery law.”