United States v. Quincy Marquice Taylor -Eastern District of Kentucky at Lexington

Circuit 6Jun 16, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 77/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The Sixth Circuit held that the district court did not violate Quincy Taylor’s Confrontation Clause rights either by refusing to compel production of an expunged state-court file relating to the government’s key witness or by limiting cross-examination about the underlying facts of that witness’s prior charges. Concluding that the Confrontation Clause does not confer a pre-trial discovery right and that Taylor was given adequate latitude to explore bias at trial, the court affirmed his drug and firearm convictions.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause creates a pre-trial right to compelled discovery of third-party documents that could help impeach a witness at trial.

Circuit Positions

Circuit 0Circuit 3Circuit 6(this circuit)Circuit 7Circuit 10Circuit 11

Confrontation Clause does NOT include a pre-trial right to compelled discovery; the right is satisfied by an opportunity for effective cross-examination at trial.

Circuit 8

Denial of access to crucial documents before trial CAN, in some circumstances, violate the Confrontation Clause.

Conflict Summary

Most circuits that have addressed the question hold that the Confrontation Clause guarantees only an in-court opportunity for effective cross-examination and does not confer any separate pre-trial discovery right, whereas the Eighth Circuit has indicated that the denial of access to certain materials before trial can, in limited circumstances, violate confrontation rights.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Quincy Marquice Taylor
Appellee:United States of America

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Philip C. Lawson, True Guarnieri Ayer, LLP, Frankfort, Kentucky
Appellee:Amanda Harris Huang and Charles P. Wisdom, Jr., United States Attorney’s Office, Lexington, Kentucky