Opinion ID: 2162363
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Deadly Weapon Indictment Instrument's Description Substantive

Text: The Superior Court granted the State's motion to amend Johnson's indictment for Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony, changing the weapon allegedly used from chair to chair and/or table. The description of the instrument used during a felonious assault is an essential element of the crime of Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony. [58] The substantive nature of the Superior Court's amendment to the weapon count in the grand jury's indictment of Johnson is reflected in the prior decisions of this Court. [59] In Harley, the defendant was charged with Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony, as well as Assault. The indictment in Harley described the deadly weapon as a tire iron, but the evidence presented by the State at trial established that the item used was actually part of a jack stand. Nevertheless, a jury found Harley guilty on both charges. After the verdict, the Superior Court granted the State's motion to amend the indictment, changing the weapon from tire iron to jack stand. Harley appealed. This Court determined that there was a substantive difference between a tire iron and a jack stand. Therefore, Harley's conviction for Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony had to be reversed. [60] The Harley decision is remarkably similar factually to Johnson's case. Johnson was indicted by the grand jury for possessing a chair as a deadly weapon. The State's most probative evidence at trial on the deadly weapon offense, however, demonstrated that Johnson possessed a table. The only difference is that the Superior Court allowed the State to amend the indictment before the jury deliberated in Johnson's case, rather than after the verdict, as in Harley. Any ambiguity created by a substantive variance between the material elements of the felony alleged in the grand jury's indictment and the State's proof at trial cannot be corrected, however, by a judicial amendment either before or after the petit jury's verdict. [61] In Johnson's case, we cannot know if the grand jury would have returned an indictment for a deadly weapon count based upon Johnson's possession of a table. Nonetheless, because of the table evidence admitted against Johnson at trial and the Superior Court's instructions to the jury after amending the indictment, the trial jury may have convicted Johnson based on possession of a table. If so, he was convicted on a charge the grand jury never made against him. [62] As the United States Supreme Court held in Bain, when construing the grand jury protection in the federal system, [A]fter the indictment was changed it was no longer the indictment of the grand jury who presented it. Any other doctrine would place the rights of the citizen, which were intended to be protected by the constitutional provision, at the mercy or control of the court or prosecuting attorney.. . . [63] The judgment of conviction for Johnson's Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony must be reversed. The identification of the instrumentality allegedly used is a material element of a deadly weapon charge. The judicial amendment of that material element of the deadly weapon count in the grand jury indictment by the Superior Court was a substantive change. [64] It violated Johnson's right to be indicted by a grand jury that is guaranteed by the Delaware Constitution. [65] In Harley, the appellant's conviction was reversed and a judgment of acquittal was entered because the evidence offered at trial did not support a conviction under the deadly weapon count of the indictment as it was returned by the grand jury. [66] Unlike the Harley case, however, the State did present evidence that Woodward was hit with a chair by one or more of his assailants, as charged in the original indictment and also in the reindictment. Johnson can be retried for the weapon offense because the jury may have concluded that Johnson was guilty as originally charged of possessing a chair.