EFiled: Apr 14 2014 11:24AM EDT Filing ID 55293880 Case Number Multi-Case IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF DELAWARE ) ISAIAH W. MR. MCCOY, ) Nos. 558, 2012 and 595, 2012 Appellant, ) (CONSOLIDATED) ) ) Court Below: Superior Court V. ) of the State of Delaware, in and for ) Kent County ) ) Cr. ID. No. 1005008059A STATE OF DELAWARE, ) Appellee. ) ) CORRECTED OPENING BRIEF FOR APPELLANT MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN Herbert W. Mondros (Del. Bar No. 3308) 300 Delaware Ave., Suite 800 Wilmington, Delaware 19809 (302) 888-1112 (telephone) (302) 888-1119 (facsimile) WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP *Erek L. Barron, Pro Hac Vice 7501 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 700W Bethesda, MD 20814 (301) 804-3613 (telephone) (301) 804-3643 (facsimile) Counsel for Appellant Isaiah Mr. McCoy *Counsel to Argue Appeal Dated: April 14, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CITATIONS ........................................................................................ iii NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................. 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................................................................. 3 STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................ 5 I. THE STATE’S CASE ........................................................................... 5 A. Accomplice Testimony ............................................................... 5 B. Scene Witnesses ........................................................................ 12 C. Expert Witnesses and Other Evidence ...................................... 13 D. Miscellanies .............................................................................. 16 II. THE DEFENSE’S CASE .................................................................... 18 ARGUMENT ........................................................................................................... 22 I. THE TRIAL COURT VIOLATED DEFENDANT’S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL BY SEATING A JUROR WITH SIGNIFICANT POTENTIAL BIAS OVER DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION ....................................................................................... 22 II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO GIVE THE MODIFIED BLAND INSTRUCTION TO THE JURY REGARDING TALAN BISHOP’S ACCOMPLICE TESTIMONY ...................................................................................... 29 III. THIS CASE, CONSISTING ONLY OF THE UNCORROBOARTED TESTIMONY OF ACCOMPLICES AND NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, WAS INSUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN DEFENDAT’S CONVICTIONS ...................................... 32 A. The “heightened reliability” requirement for death penalty cases ............................................................................. 38 i IV. IN THIS CASE DEPENDING ENTIRELY ON ACCOMPLICE CREDIBILITY, THE PROSECUTOR’S MISCONDUCT JEOPARDIZED THE FAIRNESS AND INTEGRITY OF MR. MCCOY’S TRIAL ......................................... 40 A. Improper vouching .................................................................... 43 B. Disparaging Defendant and his Right to Self-Representation ................................................................... 46 C. Exploiting and Threatening the Defendant ............................... 49 V. THE DEATH PENALTY STATUTE VIOLATES THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE AND THE SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION ....................................... 53 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 55 SENTENCING ORDER .......................................................................... EXHIBIT A ii TABLE OF CITATIONS Federal Cases Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013)........................................... 4, 53, 54 Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U. S. 466 (2000) .................................................. 53, 54 Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1985) ............................................................ 23, 25 Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935) ........................................................... 41 Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975) ....................................................... 46, 49 Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 349 (1977) ................................................................ 38 Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993) ................................................................. 39 Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978) ................................................................ 38, 39 Murray v. Giarratano, 492 U.S. 1 (1989) ............................................................... 39 Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002) ................................................................ 53, 54 Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995) ....................................................................... 39 Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) .................................................................. 23 United States. v. Robinson, 421 F. Supp. 467 (D. Conn. 1976) .............................. 25 Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 280 (1976) ............................................ 38, 39 State Cases Baker v. State, 906 A.2d 139 (Del. 2006) .......................................................... 41, 42 Banther v. State, 823 A.3d 467 (Del. 2003) ............................................................ 23 Bland v. State, 263 A.2d 286 (Del. 1970) .......................................... 5, 29, 30, 32, 33 Brice v. State, 815 A.2d 314 (Del. 2003) ............................................................. 5, 54 Brooks v. State, 40 A.3d 346 (Del. 2012) .................................................. 3, 5, 29, 30 Bunting v. State, 907 A.2d 145 (Del. 2006) ............................................................. 46 Chisum v. State, 612 A.2d 157 (Del. 1992) ............................................................. 31 Christopher v. State, 824 A.2d 890 (Del. 2003) ...................................................... 46 Claudio v. State, 585 A.2d 1278 (Del. 1991) .......................................................... 30 Clayton v. State, 765 A.2d 940 (Del. 2001) ............................................................. 43 iii Commonwealth v. Sapomik, 549 N.E.2d 116 (Mass. App. Ct. 1990) ..................... 50 DeLuzio v. People, 494 P.2d 589 (Col. 1972) ......................................................... 49 Erskine v. State, 4 A.3d 391 (Del. 2010) ................................................................. 30 Govan v. State, 655 A.2d 307 (Del. 1995) ............................................................... 42 Hall v. State, 12 A.3d 1123 (Del. 2010) .................................................................. 23 Hardy v. State, 962 A.2d 244 (Del. 2008) ............................................................... 43 Henderson v. State, 279 Ark. 435 (1983) ................................................................ 33 Hooks v. State, 416 A.2d 189 (Del. 1980) ......................................................... 30, 46 Hughes v. State, 437 A.2d 559 (Del. 1981) ............................................................. 42 Hunter v. State, 815 A.2d 730 (Del. 2002) .............................................................. 42 Knox v. State, 29 A.3d 217 (Del. 2011) ....................................................... 22, 23, 24 McGehee v. State, 348 Ark. 395 (2002) .................................................................. 33 People v. Grove, 120 N.E. 277 (Ill. 1918) ............................................................... 32 Priest v. State, 879 A.2d 575 (Del. 2005) ................................................................ 32 Schwan v. State, 65 A.3d 582 (Del. 2013) ......................................................... 23, 24 Smith v. State, 991 A.2d 1169 (Del. 2010) ........................................................ 29, 30 Torres v. State, 979 A.2d 1087 (Del. 2009) ....................................................... 42, 43 Wainwright v. State, 504 A.2d 1096 (Del. 1986) .................................................... 42 Washington v. State, 4 A.3d 375 (Del. 2010) ................................................ 3, 33, 34 White v. State, 816 A.2d 776 (Del. 2003) ................................................................ 43 Whittle v. State, 77 A.2d 239 (Del. 2013) .......................................................... 43, 45 Zebrowski v. State, 12 A.3d 1115 (Del. 2010) ................................................... 22, 53 Constitutional Provisions, Statutes, and Rules U.S. Const. amend. V .................................................................................. 29, 32, 47 U.S. Const. amend. VI .......................................................................... 22, 29, 40, 47 U.S. Const. amend. VIII .......................................................................29, 32, 40, 41 U.S. Const. amend. XIV ............................................................................. 22, 29, 32 iv Del. Const. art. I, § 7 .......................................................................22, 29, 32, 40, 46 Del. Const. art. I, § 11 ............................................................................ 29, 32, 40, 41 11 Del. C. § 271 ....................................................................................................... 30 11 Del. C. § 512 ......................................................................................................... 1 11 Del. C. § 636 ........................................................................................................