Henry Vaughn’s trial for driving under the influence was delayed again Tuesday after his attorney, Roy Perkins, claimed the prosecution committed a discovery violation.
Vaughn is Starkville’s Ward 7 alderman. Perkins, a fellow alderman, represents Ward 6.
Oktibbeha County Sheriff’s Department arrested Vaughn for DUI, careless driving and no proof of insurance at about 2 a.m. June 19, 2014. He was released from the Oktibbeha County Jail on $1,641 bail roughly an hour after being booked. Court records show Vaughn refused to submit to a breath test following his arrest.
The insurance charge was dismissed last year after Vaughn showed he had insurance.
Vaughn was scheduled for trial Tuesday morning. The case has faced several delays, the most recent of which came after Oktibbeha County Prosecutor Haley Brown recused herself and the county board of supervisors appointed Eupora-based lawyer George Mitchell Jr. as the case’s special prosecutor earlier in the summer.
Oktibbeha County District 1 Justice Court Judge Tony Boykin said Vaughn’s case is “unique” in how long it’s taken to move to trial. However, he said he considered the prosecutor change a partially-mitigating factor of that. He said he would reset the trial to a date to be determined between both lawyers.
“It’s very important to me that both sides are prepared for trial,” Boykin said. “It needs to be heard. There needs to be a decision made. … But I think to be fair to both sides, I’ll reset this.”
Perkins said he filed a discovery request on May 12, and received a 2-page response from Mitchell on July 31. He said Mitchell gave him 14 additional pages of material Tuesday morning.
“This morning was my first time getting it,” Perkins said. “The prosecutor had indicated it was attached to the discovery so I had to call him yesterday and tell him I didn’t have i. I just got it this morning. Judge, this is 14 pages of some very serious allegations. These documents contain some alleged statements that we highly contest, so we object to the use of this and would like the court to consider this as to how we should move forward with this today.”
Perkins said the documents contain statements from the arresting and booking officers, as well as narrative from the arrest.
Mitchell said Perkins called him two weeks ago and thanked him for the discovery material he’d provided. He said Perkins gave no indication at that time that material was missing from the already-provided material.
He added that the additional material he provided to Perkins was not mandatory discovery material for a DUI case.
“I have, out of an abundance of caution, provided him with what I had,” Mitchell said. “Not only did I provide him what I had, I provided him, in discovery that oral statements were made by his client to the officer and the booking officer.
“If I recall my law right, (Perkins) had access to all the public documents just like I do,” he continued. “It’s not necessarily a violation of discovery we’re talking about here. It was me going overboard providing something I didn’t have to.”
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 32 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.