Rashid Roy, Below v. State of Delaware, Below

Summary

The court affirmed Roy's convictions, holding that although his initial detention and subsequent arrest violated constitutional standards, the physical evidence would inevitably have been discovered through lawful police procedures and was therefore admissible. Roy's challenge to the use of drug-usage evidence was reviewed only for plain error because he stipulated to its admission and did not object at trial; the court found no plain error because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming.