Arizona’s rules of criminal procedure explicitly give courts authority to preclude evidence if a party violates the discovery rules. However, the Supreme Court of Arizona has stated that “preclusion is rarely, if ever, an appropriate sanction for a discovery violation.” As a result of that language, Arizona trial courts almost never preclude evidence, especially when that evidence is a witness who was untimely disclosed or failed to participate in a deposition. I’ve tried arguing that preclusion is frowned upon because most published opinions deal with defendants noticing witnesses at the last minute. Defendants have a Sixth Amendment right to present witnesses, so the courts need to avoid preclusion so as not to infringe on defendants’ constitutional rights. I usually provide a string cite of cases frowning upon … Read entire article »