Title: Osman v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

BRYAN OSMAN, §
§ —No.491,2010
Defendant Below, §
Appellant, §
§ Court Below: Superior Court
v. § ofthe State of Delaware,
§ _ inand for New Castle County
STATE OF DELAWARE, §
§ Cr. No. 0910005347
Plaintiff Below, §
Appellee 8

‘Submitted: February 9, 2011
Decided: April 5, 2011

Before BERGER, JACOBS, and RIDGELY, Justices,

ORDER
This S* day of April 2011, upon consideration of the briefs of the parties, it
appears to the Court that:
(1) Bryan Osman was found guilty, after a jury trial, of first degree robbery,

possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (“PFDCF"), and second

 

degree conspiracy. He appeals only his PFDCF conviction, claiming it was not

supported by sufficient evidence, We find no merit to the appeal, and affirm.
(2) On a Saturday moming, Robert Gailey walked to a gas station to buy

 

soda and cigars. Gailey met Osman and two other young men outside the gas

station, and Gailey agreed to buy some marijuana from Osman. After Gailey made
his purchases at the gas station, he followed Osman and the other men to a nearby
apartment complex, where Osman was going to get the marijuana.

(3) Gailey was waiting outside the building for about 25 to 30 seconds, when
Osman came up behind Gailey, put his left arm around Gailey’s throat and a gun to
Gailey’s head. Osman and the other two men rifled through Gailey’s pockets and
took some personal items. They then told Gailey to go to his house so they could
take his electronics and/or money. Gailey went into a neighbor's house instead,
and called 911. Osman and the other men became suspicious when Gailey failed to

reappear, 50 they left the area,
(4) At trial, Gailey testified about Osman’s gun:

Q:—.... Can you please describe the gun.
It looked like I guess a .9-millimeter, the older .9-
millimeter. The front was a litte bit more rounder.
. . . do you have any knowledge about the difference
between handguns versus airsoft versus BB guns?
Yes.
How were you about to distinguish between the gun that
‘was up against your head and a BB gun or an airsoft?
A: [could tell the coldness of the metal. BB guns are
generally plastic. It was coldness of the metal
Are you able to estimate the amount of time
you were able to observe the gun?

2

 

 

Qe

 

 
 

Probably about 5, 10 seconds. I seen it, even when
hhe put it on the side, when he put it in his
pocket...

That's later, after —

Yeah. I didn’t know if it was real or not. I'm not
going to take that chance, if it’s not a real gun or
it’s areal gun.

But you made some mention as to seeing the
barrel?

Yes.

What about the barrel? Can you tell us or explain
the barrel as it distinguishes between a BB gun or
an airsoft gun or a real gun?

I believe the airsoft gun has litte tips on it, and 1
can’t tell if it looks fake or whatever, but I could
see the barrel. It was a real gun.

a
AL

 

On eross-examination, Gailey equivocated:

Q Now, you indicated you thought that was a real
gun?

No. I wasn’t going to take that risk if it was a gun

or nota gun or whatever.

But you're not really sure it’s a gun, correct?

It was a gun, yeah. I couldn’t tell you if it was a

BB gun ora real gun or a stun gun or whatever.

But you don’t know whether it was a BB gun, stun

‘gun, toy gun, pellet gun or a real gun, correct?

‘Yeah?

 

Q:

AL
@
AL

Osman also took the stand, and, after describing his version of the events, testified

that he had no gun.

" Appellant's Appendix, A-22.
+ Appellant's Appendix, A-27.
(5) On appeal, Osman claims there was insufficient evidence to support his
PFDCF conviction. Because he did not raise this claim in the Superior Court, we
review for plain error, which is error “so clearly prejudicial to substantial rights as
to jeopardize the fairness and integrity of the trial” We find no plain error.

(6) The jury, as the trier of fact, “is responsible for determining witness
credibility, resolving conflicts in testimony and for drawing any inferences from the
proven facts." “A person who is in possession of a firearm during the commission

of felony is guilty of [PFDCF].”* A “firearm” “includes any weapon from which

 

a shot, projectile or other object may be discharged by force of combustion,
explosive, gas and/or mechanical means, whether operable or inoperable, loaded or
unloaded. It does not include a BB gun.”*

(7) Osman argues that, because the only evidence of any type of weapon
‘came from Gailey, and because Gailey conceded that it could have been a toy gun,
the conviction must be overtumed. We disagree. The jury was free to believe
Gailey’s testimony that it was a real gun, and to ignore his doubts. There is no
requirement that the actual weapon be entered into evidence, and there is no

requirement that a second witness corroborate Gailey's testimony.

» Wainwright v State, 04 A.24 1096, 1100 (Del. 1986).
‘Chao v. State, 604 A.24 1351, 1363 (Del. 1992).

'11 Del. C. § 1447A(a),

“11 Del. C. §222(12).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior
Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

Justice