Abbatiello v. State
386, 2016
| Del. | Aug 29, 2017Background
- On May 9, 2015, a motel occupant (Weston) was robbed at gunpoint; the robber fled in a black Mercedes. Surveillance video and Weston's description matched each other. Weston gave a Delaware plate number close to one registered to a 2011 black Mercedes linked to Bernard Bryant.
- Police created a photographic lineup including Anthony Abbatiello; Weston identified Abbatiello as the robber. Phone records showed attempted contact between Abbatiello and Bryant around the time of the robbery.
- Police searched Abbatiello’s residence days later; he fled when officers arrived. Clothing seized from the residence matched what the robber wore in the video.
- A jailhouse podmate testified that Abbatiello admitted the robbery, having a gun, firing three shots, and also mentioned planning to call alibi witnesses.
- Abbatiello testified and presented two alibi witnesses who placed him in Philadelphia at the time of the robbery. He was convicted on multiple counts and sentenced to a lengthy prison term; he appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutor’s alleged threat chilled alibi witnesses (due process / compulsory process) | State: warned court and defense that its witness would contradict alibi; permissible truthful warning | Abbatiello: prosecutor’s comments threatened perjury prosecution and interfered with his right to present witnesses | No plain error: comment was a permissible, truthful warning and did not substantially interfere with witnesses’ decision to testify (Torres/Pierce standard) |
| Prosecutor improperly injected personal opinion from surveillance video in closing (vouching) | State: argued reasonable inference from surveillance and eyewitness ID | Abbatiello: statement amounted to improper vouching and asserted prosecutor’s superior knowledge | Rejected: comment drew permissible inferences from evidence; not improper vouching |
| Prosecutor vouched for podmate’s credibility in closing | State: characterized testimony as truthful (inartful) | Abbatiello: isolated statement vouched for a critical witness and prejudiced his trial | No plain error: comment was isolated, podmate’s testimony was corroborative, and overwhelming independent evidence supported conviction (Wainwright plain-error test) |
Key Cases Cited
- Torres v. State, 979 A.2d 1087 (Del. 2009) (adopts Pierce test for prosecutorial interference with witness testimony)
- United States v. Pierce, 62 F.3d 818 (6th Cir. 1995) (test for substantial interference with witness’s decision to testify)
- Wainwright v. State, 504 A.2d 1096 (Del. 1986) (plain-error standard for prosecutorial misconduct review)
- Whittle v. State, 77 A.3d 239 (Del. 2013) (repetitive vouching by prosecutor can constitute improper credibility bolstering)
- Kirkley v. State, 41 A.3d 372 (Del. 2012) (prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences from evidence; improper vouching implies superior knowledge)
- United States v. Gardner, 288 F.3d 878 (7th Cir. 2001) (a truthful warning to witnesses about perjury exposure does not violate due process)