358 S.W.3d 244
Tex. Crim. App.2011Background
- Texas Court of Criminal Appeals order regarding mandamus in a sexual assault case in which the complainant was interviewed at the Child Advocacy Center.
- District Court ordered the State to copy a DVD recording of the interview for defense counsel.
- State sought mandamus to require district judge to rescind the copying order.
- Statute at issue is Code of Criminal Procedure Article 39.14(a), governing pretrial discovery and copying.
- Court holds the State’s copying order is authorized by Article 39.14; leave to file mandamus denied; Justice Keller file dissent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court could compel the State to copy the DVD for defense | State: Article 39.14 authorizes the court to order copying of designated nonprivileged materials in the State’s possession | Dittman: copying should not be compelled by court; defense should view or copy under supervision rather than receive a copy | No mandamus relief; copy order authorized by Article 39.14; State must copy the DVD for defense |
Key Cases Cited
- Hackathorn v. State, 422 S.W.2d 920 (Tex.Crim.App. 1964) (pretrial discovery limits; historical context of discovery authority)
- Freeman v. State, 317 S.W.2d 726 (Tex.Crim.App. 1958) (pretrial discovery limits; Article 39.14 framework supports limited discovery)
- Pettigrew v. State, 289 S.W.2d 935 (Tex.Crim.App. 1956) (criminal defendants have no broad inherent discovery authority; Article 39.14 controls)