Legal Opinion

Baynum v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided February 8, 2016No. 168, 2015PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VALIHURA, Justice:

Pending before this Court is an appeal from the Superior Court’s October 21, 2014 bench ruling, denying Steven Bay-num’s (“Baynum”) Motion in Limine (“Motion”) prior to his trial on charges stemming from an incident at the residence of Manisha Baynum (“Manisha”). The bench ruling was issued following an evidentiary hearing conducted in connection with Bay-num’s Motion, which sought dismissal of his case before trial or, in the alternative, a jury instruction pursuant to Lolly v. State 1 and Deberry v. State 2 on the theory that the State failed to collect or preserve…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Bailey v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1987
  3. Deberry v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1983
  4. Hammond v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1989
  5. Lolly v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1992

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Baynum v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2019
  2. Boulden v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2026
  3. Rosser v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2019
  4. State v. BaynumSuperior Court of Delaware · 2018
  5. State v. JacksonSuperior Court of Delaware · 2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API