Prosecutors are facing mounting pressure to meet Brady disclosure obligations as caseloads grow, digital evidence volumes expand, and staffing remains stretched. The legal duty to identify, review, and turn over potentially exculpatory material has not changed, but the mechanics of doing so have become far harder to manage at scale.
The challenge sits at the intersection of two forces. On one side, the constitutional obligation under Brady v. Maryland requires prosecutors to disclose evidence favorable to the defense. On the other, modern discovery increasingly means terabytes of body camera footage, phone extractions, social media records, and communications data. Reviewing all of it for exculpatory content is a resource-intensive task that competes with everything else a prosecutor's office must do.
Where the pressure builds
Resource constraints compound the problem. Many offices operate with limited staff who carry heavy caseloads. When a single prosecutor handles dozens of active matters, the time available for exhaustive evidence review shrinks. The risk of missing something material rises accordingly.
Digital evidence has changed the arithmetic. A decade ago, discovery might mean a few boxes of paper. Today, a single investigation can generate more data than a team can manually review in weeks. The obligation remains the same, but the volume of material that could contain exculpatory information has grown by orders of magnitude.
Where tools can help
AI-powered tools are emerging as a way to reduce the administrative burden of evidence review. These systems can help sort, search, and flag potentially relevant material faster than manual review, giving prosecutors more time for the legal judgment that Brady compliance ultimately requires. The technology does not replace the prosecutor's decision-making; it narrows the field so that judgment can be applied where it matters most.
Thomson Reuters has published a white paper on the topic, Brady compliance and CoCounsel Legal: The right tool at the right time, which examines how AI-assisted review fits into disclosure workflows.
Why this matters for legal professionals
For prosecutors, a Brady violation can mean overturned convictions, professional discipline, and damage to public trust. For defense attorneys, understanding how opposing counsel manages disclosure obligations affects case strategy and timing. The practical takeaway is straightforward: offices that rely on manual review alone will struggle to keep pace with discovery volumes, and legal professionals on both sides should understand what AI-assisted review can and cannot do in the disclosure context.
Your membership also unlocks:
