State v. Rogers

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, declining to extend a codefendant’s successful challenge to him because the defendant was not similarly situated or equally harmed by the untimely disclosure of the cell-site-location expert. The court also declined to review the defendant’s unpreserved claim that the trial court should have conducted a reliability hearing, holding that retroactivity of a new nonconstitutional evidentiary rule does not excuse failure to preserve the claim. No separate opinions were filed.