Deputy v. State

Decision Date07 May 1984
Citation500 A.2d 581
PartiesAndre Stanley DEPUTY, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. . Submitted:
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Delaware

Gary R. Dodge (argued), of Dodge & O'Brien, P.A., Dover, and Dean C. Johnson, Lewes, for appellant.

Gary A. Myers (argued), Georgetown, John A. Parkins, Jr. (argued), Wilmington, and Dana C. Reed, Dover, Department of Justice, for appellee.

Catherine B. Hagerty, Wilmington, and John Williams, Dover, for American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware, Inc., as amicus curiae.

Before HERRMANN, C.J., McNEILLY, HORSEY, MOORE and CHRISTIE, JJ., constituting the Court en banc.

HERRMANN, Chief Justice, HORSEY, MOORE and CHRISTIE, Justices:

Andre Stanley Deputy was convicted of two counts of intentional murder, two counts of felony murder, one count of first degree robbery, and one count of possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony, all arising from the deaths and robbery of Alberta and Byard Smith. 1 Following a separate penalty hearing, the defendant received the death sentence for each of the four first degree murder convictions.

In this appeal Deputy sets forth numerous grounds which he contends require reversal of the judgments entered in both the guilt and penalty phases of his trial. A principal contention is that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when he was further interrogated by the State police after a committing magistrate had remanded him to the custody of prison authorities in lieu of bail. Although the defendant had made a prior statement before his appearance in court, at the later interrogation after his commitment a second statement was given, which provided essential evidence to sustain his conviction on the two intentional murder charges. Given the nature of this constitutional violation, we must conclude that the defendant's second statement to the police in which he confessed to the crime was, therefore, improperly admitted at his trial. We accordingly reverse the defendant's intentional murder convictions but find the error harmless as to the felony murder convictions. Because we find no merit in any of the defendant's other contentions, we conclude that the felony murder convictions

and the death penalty imposed for those convictions should be affirmed.

GUILT PHASE
I.

The State's evidence revealed the following:

Early in the morning of February 7, 1979, the Delaware State Police, stationed at Troop 5 in Bridgeville, received a report of an apparent double homicide west of Harrington, Delaware.

Detectives Chaffinch and Calloway responded to the report. When they arrived, police officers from the Harrington Police Department were already at the scene, along with the decedents' son, Arthur B. Smith, who had discovered the bodies of his parents, Byard and Alberta Smith, upon entering the house.

His parents, an elderly couple, had been brutally stabbed to death. Mr. Smith, who was 68 years old, 5'6"'" tall and weighed 150 lbs., had received 79 separate stab wounds. His wife, who was 69 years old, weighed 70 lbs. and was 5'4""' tall, had sustained 66 separate stab wounds. The wounds each victim sustained varied in size. From the size of the wounds, the medical examiner was subsequently able to determine that each had been stabbed with two weapons--a bayonet-type knife and a smaller knife.

The police found certain items missing from the couple's home. First, Smith had noticed that his father's car was missing from the driveway. The television set was also gone, its antenna cable apparently cut with a knife. Bags of frozen food were strewn about the scene. Police found the watchband pin of a watch as well.

While they were investigating the scene, the two detectives received a report that the car belonging to the deceased had been located north of Felton, Delaware. Interviews of Felton area residents yielded a description of the man believed to have abandoned the car earlier that morning. A Smith family member told police that the description matched that of William Henry Flamer, a nephew of the deceased who lived near the Smith residence with his grandmother and the defendant, Deputy.

When the detectives went to Flamer's home, his grandmother told them that Flamer was not there; nor, did she have any knowledge of his whereabouts. She permitted police to search the second floor of the house for Flamer. They discovered brown paper bags containing items of frozen food similar to those found at the Smith residence. In addition, the police seized a bayonet, stained with what appeared to be dried blood, and a bayonet sheath. In a first-floor closet, the detectives found a television set, the cable from which matched the piece of cut antenna cable left in the Smith residence.

Based on this evidence, the detectives obtained a warrant for Flamer's arrest. While at Justice of the Peace Court 6, the detectives received a report that Flamer had been seen at the Blue Moon Tavern, south of Woodside, Delaware, on Route 13. Three State police detectives, accompanied by two Harrington police officers, drove to the Blue Moon Tavern.

One of the detectives recognized Flamer, walking down Route 13 with two companions, Ellsworth Coleman and the defendant, Andre Stanley Deputy. All three were stopped and frisked for weapons; although the police felt a wallet in Deputy's back pocket, they did not remove it. All three were read Miranda warnings. Flamer was arrested pursuant to the warrant. When asked if he had any identification, Deputy replied that he did not. When asked his name, Deputy replied in an "evasive" manner, lying about his identity, although the police were unaware of the misrepresentation at the time. All three were taken into custody at 3:15 p.m. and were transported to Troop 5, arriving at 4:00 p.m.

Upon arriving at Troop 5, Flamer told the police that Deputy had awakened him that morning and asked him to accompany Based on Flamer's statement and Deputy's possession of the victim's wallet and watch, which was missing a watchband pin like the one found at the scene, Deputy was arrested at approximately 4:30 p.m.

Deputy to the Smith house to remove some food. There, Flamer said, he found the Smiths dead. At the same time, other detectives interrogated Deputy. He was read his Miranda rights, which he indicated he understood. When asked if he wished to see an attorney, Deputy made no response. In Deputy's coat pocket, police found a wallet belonging to Byard Smith. They also found two watches, one of which was missing its watchband pin. Deputy told police that Flamer had given him the wallet.

Because Flamer and Deputy had given conflicting stories as to the other's involvement in the murders, police continued their questioning. At approximately 6:00 p.m., Flamer revealed Deputy's true identity and stated that Wilmington police had an outstanding murder warrant for Deputy's arrest. After verifying that information, the State Police arrested Deputy on that warrant at approximately 7:00 p.m. The police then provided dinner for the two men.

During questioning that evening, Deputy told Detective Chaffinch that he was telling the truth. Chaffinch did not believe him, however, and asked Deputy to take a polygraph test. Deputy agreed. Due to a snow storm 2 and Detective Chaffinch's desire to question him further, Deputy did not make his initial appearance before a judicial officer that day 3 and was held overnight at the Bridgeville Police Department.

The police transported Deputy to Troop 5 at approximately 9:00 the next morning. A polygraph test was administered two hours later. Before undergoing the test, Deputy signed a written form acknowledging the Miranda warnings. He did not request a lawyer. 4 When the examiner told Deputy that he had failed the polygraph, Deputy told police that he had accompanied Flamer to the Smith's residence to obtain some money. When an argument ensued, Flamer began stabbing Byard Smith. Alberta Smith had begged Deputy to stop the attack, but Deputy did nothing and went home. Detective Chaffinch then taped Deputy's statement.

Detective Chaffinch took Deputy before the Justice of the Peace for his initial appearance at approximately 2:00 p.m. At that hearing, Deputy was again read his Miranda rights and told of the penalties he faced. 5 The Justice of the Peace then committed Deputy to the Sussex Correctional Institute (hereinafter "S.C.I."), in default of bail.

Deputy was taken back to Troop 5 to await transportation to S.C.I. At Troop 5, Detective Chaffinch questioned Deputy briefly while arrangements were made to commit Deputy to prison. Uniformed officers then left with Deputy headed for S.C.I.

However, Detective Chaffinch ignored the judicial commitment order and directed the officers to bring Deputy back to Troop 5 for further questioning in light of discrepancies in Deputy's story and new information provided by Flamer. After the polygraph, Deputy had stated that he had gone to the Smith's to obtain money, but had left when the stabbing started, without having obtained any funds. Yet, when he was taken into custody, he had $25 in his pocket. Therefore, Chaffinch wondered why Deputy needed to obtain money from the Smith's when he already had funds. Moreover, while Deputy was making his appearance before the magistrate, Flamer had told police that both he and Deputy had participated in the stabbings, using two knives. Police then located the second knife at the scene of the arrest.

On cross-examination, Chaffinch admitted that he violated the judicial commitment order because "[he] wanted to try to get the correct statement from him." He testified further:

Q. What would you characterize as a correct statement?

A. Truth.

Q. A confession?

A. Yes, you could say that.

Deputy arrived back at Troop 5 at about 4:30 or 5:00 p.m. and Detective Chaffinch questioned him briefly about these concerns. Chaffinch then departed...

To continue reading

Request your trial
76 cases
  • DeShields v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Delaware
    • 27 Mayo 1987
    ...murder pursuant to 11 Del.C. § 636(a)(2), that conviction established the statutory aggravating circumstance. See Deputy v. State, Del.Supr., 500 A.2d 581, 602 (1985); cert. denied, 480 U.S. 940, 107 S.Ct. 1589, Two additional inquiries are posed under subparagraph a of section 4209(g)(2). ......
  • Flamer v. Chaffinch
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • 30 Junio 1993
    ...on existing precedent. Referring to both the Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387, 97 S.Ct. 1232, 51 L.Ed.2d 424 (1977), and Deputy v. State, 500 A.2d 581 (Del.Supr.1985) cases, Flamer argues that had the state court only known of Flamer's invocation of his right to counsel at his appearance be......
  • Sanders v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Delaware
    • 12 Octubre 1988
    ... ... Submitted: Oct. 12, 1988 ... Resubmitted After Supplemental Briefing: April 19, 1990 ... Decided: Dec. 28, 1990 ... Page 119 ...         On Appeal from Superior Court. Conviction Affirmed. Remanded for Resentencing ...         M. Jane Brady (argued), Deputy Atty. Gen., Dept. of Justice, Georgetown, and Timothy J. Donovan, Jr. and Thomas H. Ellis, Deputy Attys. Gen., Dept. of Justice, Wilmington, for appellee ...         Theopalis K. Gregory (argued), Gregory and Gregory, and Selma Hayman, Berg, Bifferato, Tighe & Cottrell, P.A., and ... ...
  • Ferguson v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Delaware
    • 3 Mayo 1994
    ...78 L.Ed.2d 173 (1983), and cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865, 106 S.Ct. 185, 88 L.Ed.2d 154 (1985), and subsequently in Deputy v. State, Del.Supr., 500 A.2d 581, 600-01 (1985), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 940, 107 S.Ct. 1589, 94 L.Ed.2d 778 (1987). Ferguson has cited no intervening, controlling legal p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The Delaware Death Penalty: An Empirical Study
    • United States
    • Iowa Law Review No. 97-6, October 2012
    • 1 Octubre 2012
    ...Life in Prison Riley v. State, 496 A.2d 997 (Del. 1985), cert. denied , 478 U.S. 1022 (1986). Affirmed Life in Prison Deputy v. State, 500 A.2d 581 (Del. 1985), cert. denied , 480 U.S. 940 (1987). Affirmed Executed DeShields v. State, 534 A.2d 630 (Del. 1987), cert. denied , 486 U.S. 1017 (......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT