State v. Miller
| Decision Date | 11 May 2017 |
| Docket Number | ID 1209007265,ID 1207010321,ID 1111020024,ID 1204003514,ID 1301022084,ID 1001009884,ID 1009013840,ID 1209004163 |
| Parties | STATE OF DELAWARE, v. RASHAUN MILLER, OMAR BROWN, KAHLIL LEWIS, EUGENIA WATSON, SAMUEL TURNER, KALIEF RINGGOLD, JANARD BROWN, CURTIS FINNEY, Defendants. |
| Court | Delaware Superior Court |
On Defendants' Motions for Postconviction Relief - DENIED
MEMORANDUM OPINIONElizabeth McFarlan, Esquire, Department of Justice, 820 N. French Street, Wilmington, DE 19801. Attorney for State of Delaware.
J. Brendan O'Neill, Esquire, Nicole Walker, Esquire, Office of Defense Services, 820 N. French Street, Wilmington, DE 19801. Attorneys for Defendants.
This decision concerns motions filed pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61 by the Office of Defense Services ("ODS") on behalf of eight defendants seeking postconviction relief based on conduct at the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner ("OCME") involving the mishandling of narcotics evidence. In 2014, the Delaware State Police and the Department of Justice ("DOJ") began investigating reports of criminal misconduct in the OCME's Controlled Substances Unit. The investigation has since been addressed in publicly available reports and a series of judicial opinions by the Delaware Supreme Court and the Superior Court.1
All eight defendants were convicted of drug-related offenses between 2010 and 2013. Five of these convictions resulted from guilty pleas, two defendants were convicted following stipulated bench trials, and one defendant was convicted after a jury trial. Their postconviction claims are all essentially premised upon the State's non-disclosure of potential impeachment or Brady v. Maryland2 material concerning the misconduct at the OCME. The motions of the defendants whopleaded guilty additionally assert that their pleas must be deemed "involuntary" under Brady v. United States and that the State must be estopped from arguing otherwise because of its position in other criminal proceedings, involving other criminal defendants.
The instant motions are just a small sample of the influx of filings made by and on behalf of over 700 criminal defendants following what has come to be known as "the OCME scandal." The ODS hand-selected the motions in these eight cases for the Court to decide and, because motions filed by the ODS in other cases are identical to those involved here, its decision in these matters should resolve many of the pending Rule 61 motions before the Court. Before addressing the procedural and legal issues raised in the motions, the Court will review the relevant facts of each defendant's case.
Rashaun Miller was arrested on January 14, 2010, after the Delaware State Police received specific information from a cooperating individual regarding a drug delivery. A large quantity of heroin and a firearm were recovered in connection with Miller's arrest and subsequently sent to the OCME for testing.3 On March 1, 2010, a New Castle County grand jury indicted Miller on a number ofdrug and weapons offenses. A superseding indictment was entered on April 26, 2010, charging Miller with Trafficking in Heroin, Possession With Intent to Deliver, Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony ("PFDCF"), Maintaining a Vehicle, Possession of a Deadly Weapon by a Person Prohibited ("PDWPP"), Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited ("PFPP"), Conspiracy Second Degree, and Resisting Arrest.
Miller filed a motion to suppress evidence, which the Court denied on June 2, 2010 following an evidentiary hearing. During the hearing, Miller's counsel stipulated to the heroin and the handgun located during the search incident to arrest. In exchange for Miller's willingness to proceed with a stipulated bench trial, the State entered a nolle prosequi as to the Trafficking, Maintaining a Vehicle, Conspiracy, PDWPP, PFPP, and Resisting Arrest charges. At the September 7, 2010 trial, the facts educed at the suppression hearing and the OCME report were admitted into evidence without objection. The Court found Miller guilty of Possession With Intent to Deliver and PFDCF and sentenced him to ten years at Level V, followed by eight months Level IV Halfway House and two years Level III probation.
Miller challenged the Superior Court's denial of this suppression motion on appeal, arguing that the police lacked reasonable articulable suspicion and probable cause to arrest and detain him. The Delaware Supreme Court rejected Miller'scontentions and affirmed the trial court's decision on August 11, 2011.4 He filed his first pro se Motion for Postconviction Relief on October 12, 2011, which was denied on April 24, 2013 and affirmed on January 14, 2014.5 On April 30, 2014, counsel filed the instant postconviction motion on Miller's behalf, along with eleven supplements thereafter.
Omar Brown was arrested on September 16, 2010. A search incident to arrest uncovered $1,241 and what appeared to be crack cocaine in Brown's possession. On October 25, 2010, a New Castle County grand jury indicted Brown on charges of Possession with Intent to Deliver a Narcotic Schedule I Controlled Substance, Possession of a Controlled Substance within 300 Feet of a Park, Possession of a Controlled Substance within 1000 Feet of a School, and Criminal Impersonation. Brown filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence on December 29, 2010, which the Court denied following an evidentiary hearing. Brown elected to proceed with a stipulated trial, thereby preserving the right to appeal the Court's ruling on his suppression motion.
The drugs recovered in Brown's case were sent to the OCME for testing. The lab report, completed by forensic chemist Theresa Moore on February 9, 2011, reflects that the substance tested positive for cocaine with a net weight of 2.28 grams.7 At trial, Brown's counsel advised the Court that Brown would stipulate to the accuracy of the OCME lab report and that "there were drugs and they did weigh 2.2 grams."8 On May 26, 2011, the trial judge found Brown guilty on all charges. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to a mandatory three-year term of incarceration followed by descending levels of supervision. The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed Brown's convictions on October 31, 2011.9
Brown filed his first pro se motion for postconviction relief on August 27, 2013. Conflict counsel was appointed and subsequently withdrew from representation. The ODS filed the instant motion on May 7, 2014 based on the misconduct at the OCME, in addition to two supplements filed December 21, 2015 and April 11, 2016.
On November 28, 2011, Kahlil Lewis was arrested and subsequently indicted for Drug Dealing and PFDCF, following a search of the home he shared with two of his relatives, Idaes Lewis and Shaqille Lewis. Police suspected Idaesand Shaqille in connection with two recent burglaries. While searching the Lewis' home for the stolen items, officers uncovered a box containing eight small bags filled with a white substance, which field-tested positive for heroin, and a wallet with Kahlil Lewis's ID.
While the probable cause affidavit for the arrest warrant and indictment both charge Lewis with possessing "heroin,"10 the lab report completed by Irshad Bajwa of the OCME on April 10, 2012 identified the substances as "oxycodone tablets."11 The State sent the report to Lewis's defense counsel on April 26, 2012. Despite the discrepancy between the drugs identified in the OCME report and the drugs he was charged with possessing, Lewis pleaded guilty to Drug Dealing on June 8, 2012.12 During the plea colloquy, Lewis acknowledged that the drugs were heroin, which he claimed he received in exchange for Percocet.13
The Court sentenced Lewis to eight years Level V incarceration, suspended for one year of Level III probation. While on probation, Lewis was convicted of PFBPP and sentenced to seven years of total unsuspended time. He was sentencedto eight years at Level V for violating probation, served consecutive with the PFBPP sentence. Lewis's counsel filed this Motion for Postconviction Relief in light of the OCME investigation on May 9, 2014. Thirteen supplements were filed thereafter.
Eugenia Watson was arrested on April 5, 2012. She was indicted thereafter on charges of Drug Dealing Heroin, Aggravated Possession of Heroin, and Maintaining a Drug Property. Police seized a significant quantity of drugs in connection with Watson's arrest which field-tested positive for heroin and were sent to the OCME for further testing. According to the lab report, completed by forensic chemist Bipin Mody, a representative sample of the drugs tested positive for heroin.14 The State faxed the report to Watson's counsel on October 12, 2012.
On October 23, 2012, Watson pleaded guilty to Aggravated Possession of Heroin in a Tier 5 quantity. Watson was declared a habitual offender and sentenced on January 11, 2013 to eight years Level V incarceration, followed by six months Level III probation. Watson filed her first postconviction motion on May 8, 2014 and has since filed thirteen supplements to that motion.
Samuel Turner was arrested on July 12, 2012 and subsequently indicted on Drug Dealing and Possession of a Controlled Substance (tier five quantity) charges. Officers recovered approximately 53.4 grams of a substance which field-tested positive for cocaine in connection with Turner's arrest. The OCME lab report of Bipin Mody, dated December 5, 2012, indicated that the drugs tested positive for cocaine.15 The State sent the OCME report to defense counsel on December 19, 2012.
On December 21, 2012, Turner pleaded guilty to two counts of Aggravated Possession of cocaine. Turner was sentenced as a habitual offender on March 8, 2013 to ten years of Level V incarceration, followed by six months of Level IV work release. His motion for postconviction relief was filed on June...
To continue reading
Request your trial