Martel D. Washington, Below v. State of Delaware, Below

Summary

The Supreme Court of Delaware held that Washington was entitled to a judgment of acquittal because the State's only evidence connecting him to the robbery was an accomplice's uncorroborated testimony that materially and irreconcilably conflicted with the victim's account. The conflicts concerned the number of participants, the presence and possession of guns, and the participants' conduct during the robbery, and they prevented a rational jury from finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court reversed the Superior Court's judgment and remanded for further action. RIDGELY, Justice, dissenting, would have affirmed because the conflicts were credibility questions for the jury and the accomplice's testimony was sufficient to support conviction.