Summary
This Delaware Superior Court order addresses the defendant’s motion in limine to exclude a detective’s expert testimony and his alternative motion for a Daubert hearing. The court evaluates the detective’s qualifications and the reliability of his proposed testimony regarding drug packaging, currency, and paraphernalia to prove intent to distribute. Applying Delaware Rule of Evidence 702 and the Daubert standard, the court finds the testimony relevant and reliable, ultimately denying both of the defendant’s motions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Detective Rosaio's testimony is admissible under Delaware Rule of Evidence 702 and the Daubert standard.
- Whether the court must conduct a Daubert hearing before admitting the testimony.
Holdings
- The court held that Detective Rosaio's testimony is admissible because he is a qualified expert under D.R.E. 702 and his methodology is sufficiently reliable and relevant.
- The court held that a separate Daubert hearing was unnecessary because the proffered testimony satisfied the Daubert factors on the record.
Key quotations
“The State contends that Detective Rosaio’s testimony is not profiling testimony. Rather, the State asserts that Detective Rosaio is providing expert testimony on admissible evidence such as the quantity of drugs found, the packaging of the drugs, the currency found, and the lack of personal use paraphernalia, in relation to the “intent to deliver” element of the drug dealing charge.” (at *1)
Factual background
Detective Andrew Rosaio, a seasoned police officer, was proposed by the State to testify about the quantity, packaging, and related evidence of marijuana found in a vehicle driven by the defendant, Demonte Kaplan. The State presented Rosaio's resume showing twelve years of law‑enforcement experience, including nine years in specialized drug units. The defendant argued the testimony was profiling evidence and did not satisfy Delaware Rule of Evidence 702 or the Daubert standard.
Procedural history
The State moved to admit Detective Rosaio's expert testimony; the defendant moved to exclude it or require a Daubert hearing. The Superior Court considered the motions and issued an order denying them.