Turner v. State
2011 Del. LEXIS 366
Del.2011Background
- Turner, Tann, and Holmes were charged with cocaine trafficking after a car they rode in was stopped for a seatbelt violation.
- Officers stopped the white Mercury Marquis when the front-seat passenger (Turner) was not wearing a seatbelt.
- Turner, Tann (driver), and Holmes were in the car; Turner disclosed $700 in cash.
- Police observed drug-related items and gear; Turner had an outstanding arrest warrant; Holmes was found with cocaine on arrival.
- The Superior Court denied Turner’s suppression motion; Turner was convicted of trafficking and related offenses.
- Turner appeals, challenging the sufficiency of accomplice-liability instruction and the suppression ruling
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accomplice instruction valid given evidence | Turner argues he was a principal, not an accomplice | Turner contends the instruction could mislead since conspiracy was charged | Accomplice instruction affirmed; evidence supported accomplice liability and no error shown |
| Pretextual stop under Delaware Constitution | Turner claims Heath precludes the stop as pretextual and seeks remand | State contends stop was based on a valid traffic violation; Heath not controlling | Stop upheld; constitutional issue deemed waived for failure to properly present under Jones criteria |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Tann, State v. Turner, 2010 WL 4060304 (Del.Super.) (discussed in context of stop and searches (WL))
- Heath Admins., Corp v. City of New York, 929 A.2d 390 (Del.Super. 2006) (Delaware Constitution pretextual stops not accepted in Heath)
- Traylor v. State, 458 A.2d 1170 (Del.1983) (review of stop and constitutional considerations)
- Jones v. State, 745 A.2d 856 (Del.1999) (criteria for proper constitutional challenge discussion)
- Ortiz v. State, 869 A.2d 285 (Del.2005) (analysis framework for constitutional arguments)
- Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (pretextual stops immaterial if probable cause exists)