Brisco v. State
This text of Brisco v. State (Brisco v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
JOHN BRISCO, § § Defendant Below, § No. 307, 2017 Appellant, § § Court Below: Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID No. 1502007987 § Plaintiff Below, § Appellee. §
Submitted: May 2, 2018 Decided: May 10, 2018
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VAUGHN and TRAYNOR, Justices.
ORDER
In this appeal, the sole issue is whether a probation officer gave impermissible
expert testimony about the precision with which a GPS ankle monitor on the
defendant was accurate. This is a close question in view of the evident purpose
behind the prosecutor’s questions that led to the testimony. In our view, we need
not reach it as the defendant does not challenge the general accuracy of the GPS
monitor on appeal (and instead contends that the monitor is exactly, not
approximately, accurate),1 and even more important, there is overwhelming
1 At oral argument, counsel for Brisco argued that the report should be taken as exactly correct, and not described as an approximation unless by a witness with the relevant scientific background. But counsel for Brisco was also candid in admitting that the same exhibit showed Brisco at a close, but different address than his home, at a time when he admits Brisco was at his home. evidence other than the officer’s testimony that placed the defendant in the vicinity
of the murder at the relevant time.2 For that reason, we find that any error was
harmless.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the verdict and sentencing order
of the Superior Court is hereby AFFIRMED.3
BY THE COURT: /s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr. Chief Justice
2 Answering Br. at 3–5 (summarizing evidence presented placing Brisco in the vicinity of the murder at the time it occurred, including statements of Jakeem Broomer and Corvan Hammond presented to the jury under 11 Del. C. § 3507, and trial testimony of Kina Madric). 3 State v. Brisco, Cr. ID No. 1502007987 (Del. Super. July 21, 2017). 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Brisco v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brisco-v-state-del-2018.