State v. Jackson

Summary

The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the state’s belatedly disclosed cell site location information expert to testify without first granting the defendant a reasonable continuance to obtain a defense expert. Because the expert’s testimony was central to identifying the defendant as the second shooter and the error was not harmless, the court reversed and ordered a new trial. The court declined to resolve the defendant’s remaining evidentiary and preservation claims because they were unlikely to arise, or might arise on a different record, at retrial.