State v. D. Colvin, 372 P.3d 471

On Sept. 4, 2014 Michael Aja was shot while seated in his Jeep; Colvin was charged with attempted deliberate homicide claiming the gun fired accidentally while he held it near the driver-side window.
The State seized and impounded the Jeep the day of the shooting; the position/distance of the gun relative to the vehicle was central to intent issues.
Defense timely moved for discovery (including the vehicle) and the District Court ordered production. The State’s expert inspected the Jeep on Oct. 30 and later concluded the shot originated about seven feet from the vehicle.
Without notifying defense or seeking the court’s leave, the State returned the Jeep to Aja on Nov. 9; Aja thereafter used the vehicle for daily travel. Defense first learned of the release from a receipt provided in discovery.
Colvin moved to dismiss for violation of due process under Brady based on the State’s failure to preserve exculpatory evidence; the District Court granted the motion and dismissed the charge. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal was erroneous for failure to preserve exculpatory evidence (Brady)	State: district court should have held evidentiary hearing; dismissal is extreme and reserved for egregious or intentional destruction; defense could have obtained or replicated evidence	Colvin: release of the Jeep while under a discovery order deprived defense of crime-scene evidence (blood spatter, GSR), prejudicing ability to prove accidental discharge	Court: Affirmed dismissal — vehicle was material evidence, release violated due process under Brady; dismissal within court’s discretion given prejudice and lack of effective alternative remedy

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (suppression of material favorable evidence by prosecution violates due process)
Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995) (defendant need not show suppressed evidence would produce acquittal to establish prejudice)
State v. Buckles, 979 P.2d 177 (Mont. 1999) (no Brady relief where defendant could not show retention of vehicle would have changed outcome)
State v. Root, 359 P.3d 1088 (Mont. 2015) (elements of Brady claim: possession, suppression, prejudice)
State v. Halter, 777 P.2d 1313 (Mont. 1989) (trial court has discretion to fashion remedies, including dismissal, for discovery violations)