Flonnory v. State
| Decision Date | 01 February 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 358, 2004.,358, 2004. |
| Citation | 893 A.2d 507 |
| Parties | Freddy FLONNORY, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Delaware |
Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID No. 9707012190.
Upon appeal from the Superior Court.
AFFIRMED.
Brian J. Bartley (argued) and Nicole M. Walker, Office of the Public Defender, Wilmington, Delaware for appellant.
Thomas E. Brown and Gregory E. Smith (argued), Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware for Appellee.
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, BERGER, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices, constituting the court en banc.
On July 13, 1997, Freddy Flonnory and his co-defendant Korey Twyman shot and killed Angela Farmer and Danya "Duke" Adams. Flonnory was indicted, tried, convicted of first degree murder as well as other crimes, and sentenced to death in October 1998. He appealed to this Court. On August 14, 2001, we reversed and remanded to a different trial judge for a new trial because one of the jurors in the first trial communicated highly prejudicial information to the other jurors, and thus violated Flonnory's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury under both the Delaware and the United States Constitutions.1 In February 2004, a jury again convicted Flonnory. After conducting a penalty hearing, on July 22, 2004, the Superior Court judge found that the mitigating factors outweighed the aggravating factors and sentenced Flonnory to life in prison on both first degree murder convictions, to a third term of life imprisonment for the attempted murder conviction, and to a total of 60 years incarceration on the remaining convictions. Flonnory again appealed to this Court. He raises eight issues on appeal. Because we find that the trial judge acted within his discretion and that any errors he made were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, we affirm the trial judge's rulings and Flonnory's convictions.
The July 13, 1997 double homicides were the culmination of a long-standing feud between Twyman and Richard Grantham. The feud began on Christmas day in 1996. During that time, both Twyman and Grantham were incarcerated at the Ferris School. Grantham, who had behavioral problems, was normally isolated from the general inmate population. On that Christmas, however, he was allowed to eat with the general population. Twyman and other inmates at Twyman's table apparently gave Grantham mean looks and made threatening gestures towards him. Grantham responded by throwing a food tray at Twyman, spilling juice on him. While the guards restrained Grantham, Twyman calmly and coolly informed Grantham that "it was not over" and that "he would get him [Grantham] in the world." The feud continued after Grantham and Twyman were released from the detention facility.
On July 1, 1997, Flonnory, who was then 18 years old, Twyman, who was then 15, and several others, were "hanging out" in the street in Bethel Village when Grantham drove by in a car with Dwayne Warren and Danya "Duke" Adams. While the car was stopped at a red light, Grantham saw Twyman, Twyman's brother Terrell, and Flonnory nearby. Twyman picked up a bottle and threw it at Grantham's car. Grantham drove off through the red light to the west side of Wilmington, where Adams retrieved his handgun.
After getting the handgun, Grantham, Adams, and Warren drove to the area of 24th and Market Streets. Twyman, who by this time had returned to this area, spotted Grantham in the car. Twyman and several others, including Flonnory, approached the car. Twyman then struck Grantham in the head with a bottle while Grantham was being pulled from the car. Adams responded by firing several shots into the group that gathered around the car. One of the shots struck Twyman in the arm. Another shot passed through Flonnory's clothes, barely missing him but leaving him unharmed. A third shot hit a car belonging to Flonnory's mother that was parked near the intersection. Several of Flonnory's nieces and nephews as well as his girlfriend were sitting in the car at the time of the shooting. When the Wilmington police arrived at the scene, neither Flonnory, Twyman, nor Flonnory's relatives informed the police that Adams was the shooter.
For the next several weeks, Twyman expressed a desire to retaliate against Adams and the "westside boys" for the shooting. On July 13, 1997, Flonnory and Twyman decided to seek revenge for the July 1 shooting. Shortly before midnight, Twyman and Flonnory got a ride to the west side of Wilmington with Lionel "Moose" Robinson. Robinson was a "gypsy," an un-licensed taxi-driver, who gave rides in his red Chevrolet Cavalier in exchange for money or drugs. After circling the area around 6th and Madison Streets, Twyman spotted Adams and instructed Robinson to park at 6th and Washington Streets. Twyman and Flonnory left the car and asked Robinson to wait for them to return. The two then proceeded through an alleyway and entered the 600 block of Jefferson Street.
Danya "Duke" Adams, Dwayne Warren, Deshawn "Dewey" Scott, and Angela Farmer were seated on chairs and on an old television set in the road near the intersection of 6th and Jefferson Streets. The four heard shots fired. They realized that they were the target of those shots when they observed sparks from bullets hitting the ground near them. Farmer, who was 17 years old at the time, was hit three times and fell dead from a fatal shot to the chest. Dewey managed to flee the scene. Adams, who was 18 years old, was struck by two bullets. Warren, after being struck by two bullets in the leg, tried to carry Adams behind a car after Adams had been shot. Adams' injuries, however, turned out to be fatal. Additional facts relevant to each of the eight issues Flonnory appeals will be set forth in the section discussing these issues.
Before trial Flonnory moved for an Order precluding the State from introducing pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 3507,2 any out-of-court interrogations, conversation, dialogues and/or declarations reportedly involving Akhee Flonnory [Freddy Flonnory's brother]. In an order dated January 14, 2004, the Superior Court judge granted the motion in part and denied it in part. During the course of the trial, the State called Akhee Flonnory to testify. Akhee took the stand and was a hostile witness. Before ending Akhee's direct examination, the State called Wilmington police Detective Liam Sullivan, through whom the State introduced a videotaped police interview of Akhee. The State also introduced several other out-of-court statements Akhee had made to the police.
Flonnory claims that Akhee's statements were double hearsay and were inadmissible because they were not based on personal knowledge, but were based on (1) newspaper accounts, (2) out of court statements made by Twyman, (3) out of court comments of other parties and (4) Akhee's conjectures. Flonnory also claims that the admission of Akhee's hearsay statements deprived him of his constitutional right to confront and cross-examine his accusers and his right to a fair trial. We refer to the three statements as the August 12, 1997 Statement, the September 22, 1998 Statement, and the September 24, 1998 Statement.
We review a trial judge's refusal to grant a defendant's motion to suppress evidence for an abuse of discretion.3 Similarly, our review on a ruling on the admissibility of a § 3507 statement is for abuse of discretion.4 Thus the trial court's judgment is reversible only if we find that the decision to admit the § 3507 evidence was clearly erroneous.5 We review an alleged constitutional violation relating to a trial court's evidentiary ruling de novo.6 We note, before specifically discussing each statement, that in three letters to the trial judge the parties presented their interpretations of Akhee's answers to interrogator's questions and substantial quotations from the transcripts of these statements. We also note that the trial judge did not admit the majority of the August 12, 1997 statement because it was double hearsay with no applicable exception.
In his January order the trial judge determined which of Akhee's answers were admissible on a question by question basis.7
The trial judge ruled that Answer 34 was admissible. In A34, Akhee uses the vague pronoun reference "they" before repeating what "they" told him. Before the trial judge, the State argued that A34 was based on a discussion about the murders Akhee had directly with Flonnory. The defense responded that the only discussion between the Flonnory brothers alluded to in A34 concerned what Freddy intended to do after the shootings occurred. Flonnory also argued that there was nothing in A34 to indicate that the initial referent "they" was Freddy Flonnory. The trial judge found otherwise. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial judge's decision to admit A34. The trial judge, apparently found that "they," included Flonnory. We will not disturb that ruling on appeal.
Akhee's out-of-court § 3507 statement telling the interrogator what Flonnory told him was "hearsay within hearsay."9 "If double hearsay is being offered into evidence, each aspect must qualify independently as an exception to the hearsay rule."10 In this case, Akhee's statement is not inadmissible double hearsay. Under D.R.E. 801(2)(A) an admission by a party-opponent is not hearsay. Thus, Flonnory's statements to Akhee, the hearsay within hearsay, are admissible. Moreover, Akhee was present at trial and defense counsel had the opportunity and did cross-examine him, thus the hearsay portion of Akhee's statement quoting Flonnory is admissible under 11 Del. C. § 3507.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cooke v. State
...Criminal ID: 9707012190 County: New Castle Sentence: Life imprisonment (following second penalty hearing) Decision on appeal: 893 A.2d 507 (Del.2006) Name: Sadiki J. Garden Criminal ID: 9912015068 County: New Castle Sentence: Life imprisonment ordered on appeal Decision on appeal: 844 A.2d ......
-
Purnell v. State
..., 940 A.2d 1, 13–14 (Del. 2007) and Page v. State , 934 A.2d 891, 901 (Del. 2007), in which we quoted a passage from Flonnory v. State , 893 A.2d 507, 525–27 (Del. 2006) opining on the circumstances when a trial judge may exercise the discretion to depart from the "default rule" against adm......
-
Starling v. State
...couple shot in home invasion without provocation) and Bailey v. State, 490 A.2d 158, 173 (Del.1983). But see, e.g., Flonnory v. State, 893 A.2d 507, 513 (Del.2006) (double homicide; life sentence imposed following second penalty hearing); Govan v. State, 655 A.2d 307, 1995 WL 48359, at *1 (......
-
Ploof v. State
...ruling), aff'd,1993 WL 541913 (Del. Dec. 21, 1993); State v. Flonnory, 2004 WL 1658496, at *1 (Del.Super. July 22, 2004),aff'd,893 A.2d 507 (Del.2006); State v. Govan, Del.Super., Cr. 92010166, Babiarz, J. (Oct. 14, 1993) (bench ruling), aff'd,1995 WL 48359 (Del. Jan. 30, 1995); Jones v. St......