Darren Leon Duncan v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The concurrence agrees that the judgment must be affirmed because the record does not establish prejudice from the State's late disclosure of a pivotal witness. It explains that prejudice turns on whether the opposing party represented that it could adequately prepare, and concludes that defense counsel's effective cross-examination demonstrated adequate preparation. The concurrence cautions that the decision does not approve disclosing prosecution witnesses on the eve of trial and suggests that a continuance ordinarily should have been granted.