Jamar K. Thompson, Defendant Below, Appellant v. State of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed the finding that Thompson violated probation. It held that the delayed disclosure did not warrant reversal because Thompson did not seek a continuance or show prejudice, and the trial court cured any incompleteness by limiting the State to disclosed evidence; it also held that the exclusionary rule does not apply to probation-revocation proceedings under the federal Constitution and that Thompson waived his separate state constitutional argument. The court further held that the evidence, viewed collectively, was sufficient to support the violation. Justice Seitz concurred, agreeing that the judgment should be affirmed because the constitutional issues potentially arising in a probation hearing were not adequately raised.