Gross Law Firm explains New York’s new criminal discovery rules

Gross Law Firm says New York’s 2025 amendments to Criminal Procedure Law Article 245 give prosecutors more room to avoid dismissal when discovery deadlines are missed, even as defendants keep the right to disclosure. The change could make defense review of missing evidence and compliance challenges more important in criminal cases statewide.

Why it matters: - The amended law changes what happens when prosecutors miss discovery deadlines in New York criminal cases. - Defendants still have a right to discovery, but dismissal is no longer the automatic pressure point it once was. - The shift could affect how quickly defense lawyers spot missing evidence and challenge a Certificate of Compliance.

What happened: - Gross Law Firm published guidance on amendments to New York Criminal Procedure Law Article 245 that took effect Aug. 7, 2025. - The changes altered the remedies available when prosecutors fail to meet discovery deadlines. - New York adopted Article 245 in 2020 to replace a narrower discovery system with automatic disclosure. - Prosecutors must still disclose discoverable evidence early in a case and file a Certificate of Compliance before announcing readiness for trial. - In People v. Bay, decided Dec. 14, 2023, the New York Court of Appeals addressed the standard for evaluating a Certificate of Compliance and upheld dismissal where the prosecution had not timely disclosed discoverable material.

The details: - Under the amended statute, an imperfect Certificate of Compliance does not by itself require dismissal. - Courts now weigh whether prosecutors acted in good faith and with due diligence. - Courts also consider whether a remedy short of dismissal can fix any prejudice to the defendant. - All five New York City district attorneys supported the amendments. - The district attorneys argued cases were being dismissed for technical discovery errors rather than proven harm to defendants. - Defense organizations opposed the changes, arguing dismissal was the main tool that forced timely and complete disclosure. - Defendants remain entitled to discovery under the amended statute. - Leopold Gross, founding attorney of Gross Law Firm and a former New York City public defender, said the discovery rules are how an accused person learns what evidence the government has, including evidence that may establish innocence. - Gross said the 2025 amendments do not eliminate the right to discovery, but they reduce the consequences when prosecutors fail to comply. - Gross said that makes experienced defense counsel more important for finding missing discovery, protecting client rights, and seeking relief before deadlines pass.

Between the lines: - The amendments appear to rebalance leverage away from automatic dismissal and toward judicial discretion. - That likely makes the quality of defense review more important, since compliance disputes may now turn on good faith, diligence, and prejudice instead of a simple missed deadline. - Gross said many people still think about criminal procedure through old assumptions from TV or past experiences, but the timeline, paperwork, and penalties for late disclosure have changed.

What's next: - Defense teams are likely to focus more on identifying missing discovery early and building a record of prejudice. - Courts will continue applying the amended Article 245 standard in future cases. - Gross said understanding the revised rules early can affect the outcome of a criminal case. - Gross Law Firm represents clients across Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, and Staten Island in criminal matters including violent crimes, drug charges, assault, theft and property crimes, white collar offenses, sex crimes, and domestic violence cases.