State v. Draper-Roberts, 378 P.3d 1261

Defendant Dawn Draper‑Roberts, an employee at a craft store, found a customer’s purse and moved it to an employee classroom; the customer later used Find My iPhone to locate her phone sounding inside the store.
Police were called; an officer investigated, and store surveillance placed Defendant in control of the purse. The purse was returned intact; Defendant was charged with misdemeanor theft.
Mid‑trial the prosecutor produced body‑camera video (not previously disclosed in discovery) that contradicted certain testimony and showed Miranda warnings and arrest footage.
The State did not disclose, before trial, an acting manager who later testified that Defendant denied seeing the purse; the acting manager had a prior retail‑theft felony conviction that defense counsel had no opportunity to discover or use for impeachment.
The State subpoenaed the store manager but declined to call her; defense counsel had previewed favorable testimony from that manager in opening, and the court allowed her to leave without testimony.
Defendant moved multiple times for mistrial based on the late disclosure and witness issues; the trial court denied mistrials and instead granted a short continuance; the jury convicted; the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Issue	State's Argument	Draper‑Roberts' Argument	Held
1) Whether denial of mistrial for late disclosure of body‑cam video (discovery violation) was error	No reversible error; defense waived by not seeking continuance; evidence was available for inspection	Late production impaired trial preparation, cross‑examination, and exclusion motions; only a mistrial would remedy prejudice	Trial court abused discretion; prejudice not cured by short continuance; mistrial warranted
2) Whether allowing undisclosed acting manager to testify was error	Acting manager could be expected as witness; no prejudice shown	Failure to disclose violated Rule 16/Rule 4(j); acting manager’s testimony was central and could have been impeached with felony retail‑theft conviction	Admission was an abuse of discretion given importance of testimony and impeachment value
3) Whether releasing subpoenaed store manager from testifying was error	Release harmless; manager’s expected testimony merely about lost‑and‑found policy	Defense relied on manager’s favorable character testimony previewed in opening; preventing testimony harmed defense	Abuse of discretion in context: given other discovery errors, manager should have remained to testify
4) Whether cumulative errors require reversal	Errors harmless or preserved arguments fail	Errors together undermined trial fairness and counsel’s opening statement, warranting new trial	Cumulative prejudice undermines confidence in verdict; reversal and remand for new trial

State v. Bluff, 52 P.3d 1210 (Utah 2002) (standard for reciting facts in light most favorable to jury verdict)
State v. Knight, 734 P.2d 913 (Utah 1987) (continuing discovery duty; Rule 16 remedies and burden shifting)
State v. Redcap, 318 P.3d 1202 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (prosecutor’s discovery failures may shift burden to State to show harmlessness)
State v. Archuleta, 850 P.2d 1232 (Utah 1993) (abuse of discretion and harmless‑error framework)
State v. Perea, 322 P.3d 4 (Utah 2013) (discretion to admit/exclude testimony; cumulative error doctrine)
State v. Clark, 322 P.3d 761 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (cumulative‑error doctrine and appellate review)
State v. Dunn, 850 P.2d 1201 (Utah 1993) (cumulative error and reversal standard)