Wilson v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed Wilson’s convictions, holding that the prosecutor’s challenged statements during closing argument did not prejudice him or warrant a new trial. The trial court adequately addressed the improper uses of “we know,” permitted a reasonable evidentiary inference about the victim’s firing position, and correctly declined to sustain objections to statements describing the jury’s fact-finding role. The court concluded that the curative instruction and clear reasonable-doubt instructions sufficiently protected Wilson’s rights.