Roopnarine v. State

Himechanri Roopnarine appeals his conviction and sentence for grand theft. He claims that the court erred in excluding his exculpatory witness based upon a discovery violation. We agree that error occurred under the facts of this case, where the prejudice to the state could have been cured by another remedy short of excluding the witness. Therefore, we reverse the conviction.

The state charged Roopnarine with grand theft of jewelry worth $300 belonging to Mary’s. Over a video surveillance system, a loss prevention officer observed Roopnarine and a young woman (Roopna-rine’s niece) take some…