Title: Redding v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 81, 2003
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: September 23, 2003

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
DEANDRE E. REDDING, 
 
) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
)  No. 81, 2003 
 
 
Defendant Below,  
) 
 
 
Appellant,  
 
)  Court Below:  Superior Court 
 
 
 
 
 
 
)  of the State of Delaware in 
v. 
 
 
 
 
 
)  and for New Castle County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
)  Cr. ID No. 0203014274 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
) 
 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
) 
 
Submitted:  August 12, 2003 
Decided:  September 23, 2003 
 
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and STEELE, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 23rd day of September, 2003 upon consideration of the parties’ briefs, 
it appears to this Court that: 
1. 
A Superior Court jury convicted the Appellant, Deandre Redding, of 
Burglary First Degree, Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a 
Felony, Theft of a Firearm, Wearing a Disguise During the Commission of a 
Felony, and Endangering the Welfare of a Child.  This appeal challenges the 
sufficiency of the evidence presented against Redding in support of the Burglary 
and the Possession of a Firearm charges. 
  
2. 
Jennifer Cox and her daughter lived in Brookside apartments with her 
boyfriend, Keith Brady.  Cox and Brady occasionally sold marijuana from their 
 
2
apartment.  Cox and her daughter were at the apartment and Brady was at work on 
the evening of February 27, 2002.  On that evening, Jason Bratton came to the 
apartment door and asked to buy marijuana.  Cox agreed, closed the door and went 
to get the marijuana.  When Cox returned and opened the front door, Redding 
barged through the doorway into the apartment.  Redding grabbed Cox and 
demanded a 9mm handgun that belonged to Brady.  Cox retrieved the safe box 
where the gun was kept, but said that she did not have the keys to open it.  Bratton 
and Redding took the safe box and ran from the apartment building.  When they 
reached a fence marking the boundary of the apartment complex, they threw the 
safe box over the fence, causing it to break open.  Bratton and Redding climbed 
over the fence, and Redding picked up the handgun.  Shortly thereafter, they 
encountered Brady riding his bicycle home from work.  Redding pointed the gun at 
him, demanded and then seized the bicycle.  Bratton and Redding then fled 
together on the bicycle.             
3. 
Redding raises two arguments in his appeal: (i) the Burglary First 
Degree conviction cannot stand because the possession of the firearm was not 
sufficiently connected to the burglary in order to raise the Burglary count from 
second to first degree; and (ii) his conviction for Possession of a Firearm During 
the Commission of a Felony cannot stand because he neither had the firearm  
physically available nor accessible to him at the time of the burglary.    
 
3
4. 
11 Del. C. § 826, states that: 
A person is guilty of burglary in the first degree when the 
person knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a 
dwelling at night with the intent to commit a crime 
therein, and when in effecting entry or when in the 
dwelling or in immediate flight therefrom, the person or 
another participant in the crime: 
(1) Is armed with … a deadly weapon … .1  
 
With respect to Redding’s first argument, the evidence sufficiently established that 
he possessed the gun during his immediate flight from the burglary.  Redding 
argues that he had already fled the scene of the burglary and did not possess the 
gun until he was outside of the apartment complex’s fence.  Additionally, he 
contends that pointing the weapon at Brady was unrelated to the burglary.  
However, in Williamson v. State,2 this Court construed the phrase “immediate 
flight” to entail “a situation where the accused is actively fleeing the scene.”3  The 
record here is clear that Redding was actively fleeing the scene of the burglary  
when he picked up the gun at the apartment complex’s fence.  Furthermore, 
Redding pointed the gun at Brady in order to facilitate his escape.  Therefore, 
sufficient evidence in the record supports the conviction for Burglary First Degree.  
 
5. 
Redding further argues that his conviction for Possession of a Firearm 
During the Commission of a Felony should not stand because the gun was locked 
                                                 
1 DEL. CODE ANN. tit. 11, § 826 (2003).  (emphasis added) 
2 669 A.2d 95 (Del. 1995). 
 
4
in the safe box and, thus, inaccessible and physically unavailable to him during the 
burglary.  Although the gun was not readily available to him while effectuating the 
burglary, when the safe box opened during the immediate flight from the 
apartment, the gun became available.  Redding therefore possessed the gun during 
the immediate flight from the burglary.  Thus, the record contains sufficient 
evidence to support the conviction for Possession of a Firearm During the 
Commission of a Felony.     
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                             
3 Id. at 98.