98 A.3d 917
Del.2014Background
- Williams was convicted in Superior Court of burglary second degree, unlawful use of a credit card, misdemeanor theft, and resisting arrest.
- The State asserted Williams burglarized Fisher’s home via an open window and took Fisher’s wallet; a Rite Aid surveillance video showed Williams using Fisher’s credit card.
- A K-9 search followed, and officers were told by a dispatcher that a tall, white male was attempting to break into a nearby BP; Williams was later arrested nearby with Fisher’s wallet.
- Defense conceded unlawful credit-card use and resisting arrest but claimed he did not burglarize the home, alleging intoxication and non-identification as the burglar.
- The trial court sentenced Williams to fifteen years as a habitual offender; Williams appealed, challenging hearsay dispatch evidence and an expert-witness instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether admission of dispatch hearsay was plain error | Williams | Williams | Waived; plain error review not applicable; harmless if any |
| Whether expert-witness instruction was proper despite no qualified expert | Williams | Williams | Proper; Corneal Breitigan qualified as expert on K-9 handling; instruction valid |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanabria v. State, 974 A.2d 107 (Del. 2009) (admission of dispatcher statements; need limiting instruction; confrontation clause concerns)
- Wright v. State, 980 A.2d 1020 (Del. 2009) (plain error review when defense waives objection as tactical)
- Johnson v. State, 587 A.2d 444 (Del. 1991) (limits of admissibility and harmless error standard)
- Bullock v. State, 775 A.2d 1043 (Del. 2001) (standard for evaluating jury instructions; harmless error considerations)
- Smith v. State, 913 A.2d 1197 (Del. 2006) (standard for reviewing jury-charge adequacy; not perfection)
- Sanabria v. State, 974 A.2d 107 (Del. 2009) (limiting instruction and confrontation concerns reiterated)