Opinion ID: 2442119
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Refusal to Rejoin the PDWBPP Offense

Text: The trial judge acted within his discretion by refusing to grant Johnson's motion to rejoin the PDWBPP charge. Pursuant to Delaware Superior Court Rule of Criminal Procedure 14 [23] , the trial judge may, in his sound discretion, sever any issue that would prejudice any party. [24] Prejudice exists, and the trial judge acts within his sound discretion to sever joined offenses, where the jury may use the evidence of one of the crimes to infer a general criminal disposition of the defendant in order to find guilt of the other crime or crimes. [25] Johnson's counsel moved to sever the PDWBPP charge on the basis that it would cause undue prejudice for the jury to learn of Johnson's previous felony conviction. Based on defense counsel's assertion, the trial judge severed the PDWBPP count. After the State concluded its arguments, Johnson's counsel believed that there was a strong likelihood his client could be convicted of PFDCF and Second Degree Burglary. In an attempt to be able to concede the possession of the weapon, yet also argue that Johnson did not burglarize the dwelling, defense counsel moved to rejoin the PDWBPP charge. Recognizing that the motion was purely strategic and had no independent support in law, the trial judge denied the motion. By refusing to rejoin the PDWBPP charge, the trial judge acted within his discretion. Rejoining PDWBPP would have raised the same prejudice issuethat the jury may convict him of the other charges based solely on his previous criminal history. Moreover, the trial judge's refusal to grant the motion saved judicial resources, as a rejoinder of the PDWBPP charge would have required both parties to reopen their case-in-chief. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion.