Summary
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed Joseph Longfellow’s DUI conviction after the trial court denied his motion for a mistrial. The court held that a handwritten “3rd” notation on the Information was a clerical error and that the trial court’s prompt instruction directing the jury to disregard it adequately cured any potential prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Superior Court abused its discretion by denying a motion for a mistrial after the jury noticed and asked about a handwritten "3rd" notation on the Information that could have suggested a prior DUI conviction.
Holdings
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a mistrial because its prompt curative instruction directing the jury to treat the notation as a clerical error and give it no consideration adequately cured any potential prejudice.
Key quotations
“The handwritten ‘third’ means nothing. It is a clerical error, and you are to disregard it and give it no consideration whatsoever.” (¶ 3)
“A trial judge should grant a mistrial only where there is ‘manifest necessity’ or the ‘ends of public justice would be otherwise defeated.” (¶ 4)
Factual background
Delaware State Trooper James Smith responded to a report that a sport utility vehicle had crashed into a tree and encountered Longfellow near the vehicle. Longfellow identified himself as the driver, and the trooper observed bloodshot and watery eyes, slurred speech, a strong odor of alcohol, and an inability to stand without assistance. Longfellow was arrested for driving under the influence, and a later blood draw showed a blood alcohol concentration of .14. During jury deliberations, the jury noticed a handwritten "3rd" notation beside the DUI count on the Information and asked what it meant.
Procedural history
A Superior Court jury found Longfellow guilty of driving a vehicle while under the influence. During deliberations, the jury asked about a handwritten notation reading "3rd" on the Information. The trial court denied Longfellow's motion for a mistrial and instructed the jury to disregard the notation as a clerical error. The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed.