Summary
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed a Family Court order finding Michael Kade delinquent for carrying a concealed dangerous instrument, specifically a taser. The Court held that testimony describing the device as a stun gun designed to shock and incapacitate a person was sufficient to establish that it was an electronic control device under 11 Del. C. § 222(4) and (10), without proof of its specific voltage or functioning. The Court also held that Kade waived his argument concerning whether all tasers qualify as dangerous instruments and found no plain error.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the concealed taser was a dangerous instrument under 11 Del. C. § 222(4) and (10).
- Whether the Family Court plainly erred by interpreting the statutory definition of dangerous instrument to include all instruments labeled as tasers regardless of their design or characteristics.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the taser was an electronic control device designed to incapacitate a person and therefore a dangerous instrument under 11 Del. C. § 222(4) and (10). The State was not required to present evidence of the device's specific voltage, testing, or functioning.
- The argument that the Family Court treated all tasers as dangerous instruments regardless of design or characteristics was waived because it was not fairly presented below, and the Supreme Court found no plain error requiring review.
Key quotations
“We are not persuaded that evidence concerning the specific voltage or functioning of the device in question is required.”
Factual background
Police responding to a report of a fight encountered Kade, who repeatedly reached toward a concealed object in his pocket. An officer removed the square object during a pat-down search and identified it as a purple taser or stun gun. The officer testified that the device was designed to contact and shock a person, could cause severe pain and serious physical injury if used correctly, and was intended for personal defense. Kade testified that he and friends had gone to the location in anticipation of a pre-planned fight.
Procedural history
Kade was charged with carrying a concealed dangerous instrument and offensive touching after police found a concealed taser in his pocket. The State entered a nolle prosequi on the offensive-touching charge. After a Family Court commissioner denied Kade's motion for judgment of acquittal and found him delinquent, a Family Court judge reviewed the matter de novo and affirmed. Kade appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court.