State v. McHenry

Summary

The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals held that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding a protection order as a sanction for the State’s inadvertent discovery violation. The appellate court concluded that a trial continuance was a less severe and feasible sanction consistent with Ohio’s discovery rules, reversed the trial court’s judgment, and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The trial court abused its discretion by excluding the April 16, 2019 protection order because the exclusion necessarily resulted in dismissal of the case and was more severe than necessary under the circumstances.
2. A trial continuance was a fair and feasible lesser sanction for the inadvertent discovery violation and should have been imposed instead of excluding the protection order.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the protection order as a sanction for the State's inadvertent discovery violation.
2. Whether a trial continuance was the least severe sanction consistent with the purpose of the criminal discovery rules under the circumstances.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded