Maine’s chief justice describes ‘increasing alarm’ at prosecutors’ discovery violations

Maine Supreme Court Chief Justice Raises Alarm Over Late Evidence Disclosure by Prosecutors

Augusta, Maine – The Maine Supreme Judicial Court’s Chief Justice Valerie Stanfill released a concurring opinion on Thursday that sharply criticized the state’s failure to disclose evidence to defendants in a timely manner. The comment, appended to a 17‑page decision in a case involving a sexual‑touching and indecent‑conduct conviction, highlights a long‑standing problem that prosecutors, defense lawyers, and lawmakers say has become even more urgent.

In the opinion, which was published on February 12, 2026, Stanfill wrote that the State “is violating its simplest discovery obligations” at an alarming frequency. She noted that, although the courts understand prosecutors’ offices are often understaffed, “when, as here and all too often, new information is obtained on the eve of trial, defendants are increasingly at risk of being unfairly surprised and prejudiced.” The Chief Justice concluded that the State must do better.

A Case That Sparked the Concerns

The issue came to light in the William Bradbury case, which was originally a sexual‑touching conviction that Bradbury appealed in 2025. Less than two weeks before Bradbury’s trial, prosecutors supplied his defense attorneys with more than 3,000 pages of evidence—a comprehensive report of his phone contents that the District Attorney’s office had only just received from the sheriff’s office. The defense said the late disclosure left them without the time to prepare a full response.

Bradbury’s conviction was upheld by the Supreme Judicial Court, which sent the case back to the lower court for a sentencing “clerical order.” In his appeal, defense attorney Rory McNamara said, “When there are no serious consequences, experience has shown, prosecutors lack incentive to ‘do better.’”

“The state has had 31 years to read that opinion,” said defense attorney Timothy Zerillo. “The state has an immense power to take away a person’s freedom. With that power comes an obligation to follow the basic rules that make a fair defense possible.”

Prosecutors Say They’re Overwhelmed

Chief Justice Stanfill acknowledged that prosecutors’ offices are “vastly understaffed” but believed most staff acted in good faith. The Maine Prosecutors’ Association echoed that sentiment, noting that its members now face large, unsustainable volumes of evidence from investigative agencies, including body‑camera footage, surveillance videos, cellphone messages, and phone records.

“Without any meaningful increase in their ranks, prosecutors can’t keep up,” said District Attorney Christopher Almy, whose office handled the Bradbury case. “This isn’t going to be the last time. It’s going to happen over and over again. It’s just impossible to keep up with what we have to do.”

Almy explained that the 3,200‑page report was in the sheriff’s office and that the DA’s office was unaware of it until it was handed over. “I didn’t want to delay the trial further because the two victims in the case were children,” he said.

The association’s director, Shira Burns, said the group plans to push legislation next year to increase prosecutor pay and the number of prosecutors statewide, especially after losing a position in Oxford County that handled domestic‑violence cases. Burns added that “increasing prosecutor positions will ensure cases and evidence are more fully analyzed.”

Defense Viewpoints

Tina Nadeau, executive director of the Maine Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said that delayed disclosures “deprive defendants of their right to prepare a defense and a right to a fair trial.” “This flies in the face of what we all should understand justice to mean,” she said.

The case also underscores a broader systemic issue: the state has been defending itself for more than four years in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union over a lack of public defense attorneys. That lawsuit remains on hold while the Supreme Judicial Court considers an order related to the matter.

Legislative and Administrative Context

Maine’s Legislature recently declined to fund a study on prosecutor pay and positions, and the state has not added new prosecutor roles for several years. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court has also complained about shortages of clerks and court marshals, and there are still several courthouses in need of repairs.

In Penobscot County, the sheriff’s office signed a five‑year, $475,000 contract with NiCE, a company that provides a digital evidence‑management system. The contract began on July 1, but it is too early to say whether it will alleviate the evidence‑overload problem.

“Staying ahead of evidence overload is a constant challenge,” said McNamara, who argued that the Bradbury case “embodies broader problems with the system.”

Looking Ahead

Chief Justice Stanfill’s opinion underscores a growing concern that the state’s discovery obligations are not being met, risking unfair prejudice against defendants. While the Supreme Judicial Court declined to overturn Bradbury’s conviction, the court’s critique signals a willingness to address systemic failures.

Prosecutors, defense lawyers, and lawmakers will likely need to work together to solve staffing shortages, modernize evidence handling, and ensure that defendants receive timely access to all material that could be used against them. The outcome will shape the fairness of Maine’s criminal‑justice process for years to come.