Case Detail
CitationTaylor v. State, 827 A.2d 24 (Del. 2003)
CrimeViolent, other
StateDE
Pros. First NameUKN
Pros. Last NameUKN
FederalNo
Trial YearUKN
BodyUKN
OpinionDefendant appealed his theft conviction. The Supreme Court of Delaware held that: (1) prosecutor prejudiced defendant when he conceded in his closing argument that jury probably could not say beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant had intent to appropriate funds alleged in first four theft counts, but could convict on the remaining four counts, and thus defendant was entitled to new trial, and (2) trial court was required to take corrective action after prosecutor's misconduct: "The prosecutor's obligation not to institute criminal charges not supported by probable cause is a continuing one and extends to the pursuit of charges at trial when the evidence fails to support probable cause. Here the prosecutor had a duty not to pursue such charges when he was convinced, as he conceded to the jury, that acquittal was probable, and not simply the possible result of exercising reasonable doubt."
Determination Year2003
Misconduct TypePT: Charging
TR: Inflammatory
C/S EffectVacate conviction or sentence
Pros. Misc. ReportedUKN
SanctionsUKN
Sanction TypeUKN
Web linkhttps://www.courtlistener.com/del/aEhT/taylor-v-state/