Published on 11/2/2025, 12:00:00 AM

District Court Discovery in Maryland: What Changed in Rule 4-262 on October 1, 2025

Maryland’s Rule 4-262, which governs discovery in District Court criminal cases, was updated effective October 1, 2025. If you handle DUI, traffic, or misdemeanor matters in District Court, these changes matter. The update expands what the State must provide without a request, adds clarity around technology like facial recognition, and tightens language on timing and remedies.

Below is a plain‑English guide to what changed and how to use it in practice.

Quick overview

• Discovery still applies in District Court in cases punishable by imprisonment.
• Definitions track Rule 4-263, keeping District and Circuit Court terminology aligned.
• The State and defense must exercise due diligence and their obligations extend to material held by people who regularly report to them.
• The State must now provide more, without the need for a defense request.

What the State must provide without a request

Under the new text of Rule 4-262(d), the State’s automatic obligations now include:

• Exculpatory information that tends to negate guilt or mitigate punishment.
• Impeachment information that tends to impeach a State’s witness. See the authorities cited in the Rule itself (for example, Brady v. Maryland and Kyles v. Whitley).
• Statements of the defendant and any co‑defendant related to the offense, plus material about how those statements were obtained.
• For each State’s witness it intends to call: name, and unless restricted by law or protective rules, address and known phone number, and written statements relating to the offense that are signed/adopted or appear in police or investigative reports.
• Material on specific searches and seizures, eavesdropping, electronic surveillance, and pretrial identifications by a State’s witness.
• Information about the use or nonuse of facial recognition technology as required by statute.
• Expert witness disclosures: identity, subjects, substance of opinions and grounds, access to written reports and results of tests or exams, and substance of oral conclusions.
• The opportunity to inspect, copy, and photograph documents, recordings, photographs, computer‑generated evidence, and other tangible things the State intends to use at a hearing or trial.
• The opportunity to inspect, copy, and photograph items obtained from or belonging to the defendant, whether or not the State intends to use them.

The Committee note cautions that “open file” may not satisfy the full scope of discovery. If it is not in the file but is within the State’s obligation under the Rule (or held by someone who reports to the State’s office), it still needs to be provided.

What is new or clarified compared to the older version

• Automatic production in District Court is now broader. Previously, many items (like statements of the defendant/co‑defendant, State’s witness statements, search/seizure and identification material, expert info, exhibits, and defendant property) flowed only “on request.” They now appear in the without‑request section of the Rule.
• Facial recognition disclosure is explicitly listed. If such technology was used or not used as contemplated by statute, the State must provide that information.
• Timing and continuances: the language on when courts may grant delay now focuses on whether compliance was refused, denied, or impracticable, not only on whether a request was made.
• Sanctions: the Rule reiterates that noncompliance does not automatically disqualify a witness. Disqualification is discretionary, and courts have a full range of remedies, including continuances, striking testimony, exclusion, mistrial, or other appropriate orders.

Focus: Section (n) — Failure to Comply With Discovery Obligation

The 2025 update materially expands and clarifies remedies under Section (n):

• Enumerated remedies: Courts may (1) order the missing discovery, (2) strike any or all testimony related to the undisclosed matter, (3) grant a reasonable continuance, (4) prohibit introduction of the undisclosed evidence, (5) grant a mistrial, or (6) enter any other appropriate order.
• Timing: The remedy language applies “at any time during the proceedings,” which supports mid‑hearing or mid‑trial relief when late disclosures create prejudice.
• Witness treatment: The Rule expressly states that noncompliance does not automatically disqualify a witness. Disqualification remains discretionary upon motion.

How to use Section (n) in practice:

• Build the record: Identify what was required under Rule 4‑262, when you requested or expected it, and how the omission prejudices preparation or examination.
• Seek targeted relief first: Ask the court to compel production and consider a short continuance to cure prejudice. If testimony has already occurred, request to strike affected portions.
• Exclusion where fairness demands: When late disclosure cannot be cured without unfair surprise, seek exclusion of the undisclosed item or testimony.
• Reserve mistrial for severe prejudice: If curative measures will not restore fairness, Section (n) now expressly lists mistrial as a permissible remedy.

Defense obligations that remain in place

On written request from the State, the defense must provide expert disclosures similar in structure to the State’s, and identify the duress defense when it will be asserted. The defense must also allow inspection/copying of documents, recordings, computer‑generated evidence, photographs, or other tangible things it intends to use at a hearing or trial. Both sides have a continuing duty to promptly supplement when they obtain new material information.

Practical takeaways for defense lawyers

Use the broader automatic production to get what you need sooner:

1. Ask for the complete automatic set

• Even though much is automatic, send a short, dated letter or email listing each category in Rule 4-262(d). This creates a clean record if you need to seek a continuance or sanctions later.

2. Check for technology disclosures

• Confirm whether facial recognition was used or not used where it could be relevant. If used, ask for the statutory details the Rule requires the State to provide.

3. Lock in witness information early

• Verify the State’s intended witnesses, addresses and phone numbers when permitted, and signed/adopted statements or police report statements relating to the offense. This speeds interviews and impeachment preparation.

4. Identify and test the State’s exhibits

• Inspect, copy, and photograph everything slated for trial. If anything appears late, incomplete, or changed, make a clear record and consider a targeted motion for remedies.

5. Police procedures and identification

• Review search/seizure packages and pretrial identifications. If policy compliance matters in your case, note what the Rule explicitly requires and what it does not. Where identification procedures are in play, analyze whether the materials disclose issues you can litigate.

6. Preserve the timeline

• Keep a discovery log. If compliance is refused, denied, or impracticable, the Rule supports asking for a continuance.

How prosecutors can comply efficiently

• Treat “open file” as a floor, not the ceiling. The Rule says you may need to provide more than what is in the file.
• Confirm your office’s systems can track facial recognition disclosures and expert materials.
• Make sure discovery flowing from people who regularly report to your office is collected and produced.

How FrizWoods uses the updated Rule

We build District Court cases with a parallel track: early discovery checklists, exhibit reviews, and targeted motions when timelines slip. We align witness interviews, expert consultation, and evidentiary challenges with the Rule’s automatic categories, so we are not waiting on avoidable requests. When discovery is incomplete or late, we develop a clear record and seek the right remedy for the client.

If your case also involves alcohol or drugs, see our Maryland DUI overview. For traffic and serious traffic matters, start with Traffic Citations or our Serious Traffic Offenses page. To discuss your case now, visit our contact page.

FAQ

Does this make District Court discovery just like Circuit Court?

It is more aligned, especially for automatic disclosures, but practitioners should still read the Rule’s specific language and any related Circuit Court provisions in Rule 4-263.

What happens if the State does not comply?

The Rule gives courts a range of remedies. A witness is not automatically disqualified, but the court can continue the case, strike testimony, exclude evidence, or enter other orders as justice requires.

What if I discover something new close to trial?

Both sides have a continuing duty to supplement promptly. If late disclosure prejudices a party, the court can grant a continuance or other relief.

Want a targeted discovery plan for your case. Get a free consult from our team on the contact page, or learn more about how we defend traffic cases and DUI cases across Maryland.