Must the State provide free copies of all criminal discovery materials? State v. Kearns Explained

In State v. Kearns, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether criminal defendants have a constitutional right to free copies of all discoverable materials or only the charging documents themselves. The case provides important guidance for practitioners regarding the scope of constitutionally mandated free discovery in criminal cases.

Background and Facts

Christopher Kearns was charged with kidnapping, assault, and intoxication. After filing a discovery motion, the State described all discoverable materials and offered two options: personal inspection and copying at the county’s per-page rate, or payment of a five-dollar flat fee for staff to copy and mail all requested discovery. Kearns refused to pay any fees, arguing that the Utah Constitution required the State to provide free copies of all discoverable materials. The trial court ruled that while Kearns was entitled to free copies of the Information and probable cause statement, the State could charge copying fees for other discoverable materials.

Key Legal Issues

The court addressed three main issues: (1) the scope of constitutionally mandated free copies under Article I, Section 12 of the Utah Constitution; (2) whether Rule 16 of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure requires free copies of discoverable materials; and (3) the reasonableness of Washington County’s fee schedule for discovery copying.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the constitutional right to receive “a copy of the accusation” extends only to the Information itself, not all discoverable materials. The court reasoned that the constitutional requirement is satisfied when defendants receive sufficient information to know “the nature and cause of the accusation” and can “adequately prepare their defense.” The court distinguished between the constitutional right to the charging document and the procedural right to discovery under Rule 16, finding that Rule 16 permits disclosure through inspection and copying at reasonable times and places without requiring free copies.

Practice Implications

This decision clarifies that while prosecutors must provide free copies of charging documents, they may charge reasonable fees for copying other discovery materials. Practitioners should budget for discovery copying costs and consider whether personal inspection and copying might be more cost-effective for extensive discovery requests. The ruling also reinforces that counties have broad authority to establish reasonable fee schedules for copying services, with challengers bearing the burden to prove unreasonableness.