Summary
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed Ryan Flamer’s convictions for drug-related offenses. The court held that Flamer waived his appellate claims by failing to cite supporting legal authority and, in any event, found no plain error under Delaware Rule of Evidence 106 in the trial court’s admission of only a four-minute portion of a recorded telephone conversation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Flamer's appellate challenges to the admission of only a four-minute portion of a recorded telephone conversation were waived because his opening brief cited no supporting case authority.
- Whether the trial court committed plain error under Delaware Rule of Evidence 106 by allowing the State to play only a four-minute portion of the recorded conversation rather than requiring the entire conversation or additional portions to be played.
- Whether the trial court had a sua sponte duty to require admission of omitted portions of the recording under Rule 106.
Holdings
- An appellant waives a legal issue on appeal by failing to present and argue it in the text of the opening brief with supporting legal authority; Flamer therefore waived all legal issues raised in the appeal.
- Flamer failed to demonstrate plain error under Delaware Rule of Evidence 106 because the record showed no error in admitting only the four-minute portion of the recording.
- The trial judge had no sua sponte duty to require the prosecutor to play omitted portions of the recorded telephone conversation.
Key quotations
“The failure to cite any authority in support of a legal argument constitutes a waiver of the issue on appeal.” (953 A.2d at 135)
“The trial judge had no duty sua sponte to require the prosecutor to play omitted portions of the recorded telephone conversation between Flamer and Sellers.” (953 A.2d at 136)
Factual background
Police stopped a vehicle driven by Kristina Sellers in which Ryan Flamer was the sole passenger and observed white powder in the vehicle. A search revealed a digital scale and cocaine, while Sellers separately surrendered more than eighty grams of cocaine and marijuana during a search. Sellers later entered a negotiated guilty plea and testified against Flamer; the State also introduced a four-minute portion of a jail telephone call in which Flamer urged Sellers not to testify.
Procedural history
Flamer was indicted in January 2007 and tried on June 21, 2007. A Superior Court jury convicted him of trafficking cocaine, delivery of a Schedule II narcotic, and possession with intent to deliver, and the court sentenced him to five years and six months at Level V incarceration followed by descending levels of probation. The Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed, holding that the appellate arguments were waived for failure to cite supporting authority and that, in any event, no plain error occurred under Rule 106.