State v. Ayon-Urbano

Even in criminal cases, “claim[s] of prejudice arising from a denial of discovery [are] reviewable on direct appeal” and generally unfit for resolution through mandamus proceedings.

After the trial court quashed his subpoena for production, Ayon-Urbano petitioned for mandamus relief requiring Meta (a third party) to produce the records at issue. Meta responded that production was barred by the Stored Communications Act 18, U.S.C. §§ 2702, 2703. Because relief for discovery related issues generally comes through the ordinary trial and appeal process, the Court is unlikely to grant mandamus relief for such claims. See HotChalk Inc. v. Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, 372 Or. 249, 548 P3d 812 (2024). Although Ayon-Urbano argued that the records were at risk of destruction, establishing the type of “special loss” that calls for mandamus relief, the Court was unpersuaded, in part due to Meta’s representations that the records at issue would be preserved through the case’s final resolution.

“The alternative writ of mandamus is dismissed.”