Arzuaga v. State
1607001820
| Del. Super. Ct. | Nov 29, 2017Background
- On July 1, 2016, Carlos Arzuaga (Appellant) had an altercation with Jessica Rosado while attempting to pick up his children; police arrested him July 8, 2016.
- After the initial confrontation, Rosado and the children drove to the Wilmington Flea Market; Appellant followed them in his vehicle.
- Rosado and her son, Carlos Arzuaga, Jr., testified that Appellant drove dangerously close to Rosado’s car (within inches) multiple times and attempted to run her off the road.
- Appellant was charged with three counts of Reckless Endangering in the Second Degree, two counts of Endangering the Welfare of a Child, and one count of Harassment; the Court of Common Pleas convicted him on three Reckless Endangering counts after a bench trial (Sept. 1, 2016).
- Appellant appealed, raising claims of witness coaching, improper leading questions on direct, and lack of physical evidence; the Superior Court reviewed the record for legal error and sufficiency of factual findings.
- The trial judge credited the testimony of Rosado and her son as consistent and persuasive, finding Appellant’s driving created a substantial risk of physical injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Arzuaga) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether son’s testimony was coached | Testimony was credible and persuasive | Son’s answers were practiced/coached by Rosado | No evidence of coaching; trial court credibility findings upheld |
| Whether leading questions on direct undermined fairness | Any leading questions did not undermine integrity of trial | Leading questions to the child on direct warranted reversal | No specific prejudice shown; no contemporaneous objection; not grounds for reversal |
| Whether conviction lacked sufficient evidence (no physical evidence) | Witness testimony established reckless conduct creating risk of injury | Verdict rested on opinion/speculation; absence of physical evidence requires reversal | No physical evidence required; judge’s factual findings supported by record; convictions affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Christiana Care Health Servs., Inc. v. Crist, 956 A.2d 622 (Del. 2008) (discusses limits on leading questions on direct examination and when they may be permissible)