Rule 72. Discovery

(a) In General. A party shall not be entitled to discovery in a proceeding for post-conviction review unless, and to the extent that, the court, upon motion and for good cause shown, grants leave for discovery. If leave for discovery is granted, the court shall specify the appropriate means of discovery, provided that depositions shall be ordered only pursuant to Rule 15.

(b) Discovery From Former Defense Counsel. If ineffective assistance of counsel is a ground of the petition and the respondent needs discovery from that defense counsel, the respondent may move for discovery, including an order requiring defense counsel to answer questions intended to allow the respondent to evaluate and respond to the petitioner's assertions of ineffective assistance. The motion shall state the nature of the disclosure sought and why it is needed. The motion shall be granted by the court for good cause shown. If leave for discovery is granted, the court shall specify the means, scope, and timing of discovery to be employed.

Committee Notes

Committee Advisory Note [December 2014] The Rule parallels the content of Rule 72 of the Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure except that in all of its subdivisions the word "court" replaces "assigned justice" wherever appearing. See Committee Advisory Note [December 2014] to M.R.U. Crim. P. 70.

[Advisory Notes to former Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure]

Advisory Committee Note – 1981 [M.R. Crim. P. 72.] Rule 72 incorporates the substance of the nowrepealed 15 M.R.S. section 2129, subsection 9 (repealed by P.L. 1981, ch. 238, § 5).

Advisory Committee Note – 1983 [M.R. Crim. P. 72.] The amendment seeks to offer guidance on the appropriate means of discovery in post-conviction proceedings.

Advisory Note – October 2013 Rule 72 has been structurally modified to accommodate two subdivisions. Subdivision (a), with the heading "In General," contains the substance of Rule 72 before the structural change. Subdivision (b), with the heading "Discovery From Former Defense Counsel," balances the interests of the petitioner and the respondent if ineffective assistance of counsel is a ground of the petition. The respondent may need timely discovery from former defense counsel in order to establish the needed facts relative to that counsel's representation. The petitioner is entitled, according to ABA Formal Opinion 10-456 (July 14, 2010), to "court-supervised" disclosure from former defense counsel. Subdivision (b) regulates the means, scope, and timing of that disclosure.