Can a Right to Discovery Be Inferred From Statutes Providing for Postconviction Relief?

Courts do not agree on whether a request for DNA testing in a postconviction proceeding implies a right to discovery even if the statute is silent about such a right. Compare People v. Callace, 573 N.Y.S.2d 137, 138 (Suffolk County Ct. 1991) (finding discovery right pursuant to statute authorizing vacation of convictions on the basis of newly discovered evidence; decision predates statute discussed in note 2) and Jenkins v. Scully, No. CIV-91-298E, 1992 WL 32342, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 11, 1992) (State ordered to produce evidence for DNA testing pursuant to rules governing habeas corpus), with Ohio v. Wogenstahl, No. C-970238, 1998 WL 306561, at *1 (Ohio Ct. App. Dist. 1 June 12, 1988) (request for DNA retesting because trial results were inconclusive is in the nature of a discovery request that the court is not required to grant in a postconviction proceeding).

Go to the Next Section: Is There a Constitutional Right to Testing Under the Brady Doctrine?

Download the complete document: Postconviction DNA Testing: Recommendations for Handling Requests (Adobe PDF)