Barnett v. State

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court held that the Superior Court abused its discretion by admitting uncharged sexual-offense evidence during the State’s case-in-chief to prove intent under D.R.E. 404(b), where the defendant’s identity, mistake, and accident were not disputed and the defense was that no sexual contact occurred. The court concluded that the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because of the substantial danger of unfair prejudice and the closeness of the evidence. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.

Holdings

1. When the State presents direct evidence that the charged sexual attack occurred and the defense is that no sexual contact occurred, the defendant's not-guilty plea does not create a predicate intent issue sufficient to justify introducing other crimes evidence during the State's case-in-chief. Admission of the uncharged sexual offenses therefore constituted an abuse of discretion.
2. The erroneous admission of the uncharged sexual-offense evidence was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because of the substantial danger of unfair prejudice and the closeness of the evidence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Superior Court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of multiple uncharged sexual offenses under D.R.E. 404(b) to prove intent when identity, mistake, accident, and whether any sexual contact occurred were not genuinely disputed.
2. Whether the admission of the uncharged-act evidence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded