Opinion ID: 2274559
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Possession of a Controlled Substance Within 300 Feet of a Church

Text: The jury also convicted Harris of Possession of a Controlled Substance within 300 feet of a Church. He appeals that conviction on two grounds. First, he claims that the trial judge abused his discretion by admitting the LIDAR distance measurement of 165 feet into evidence. [34] Second, he claims that the State did not prove that Bibleway constitutes a church, synagogue or other place of worship, as required by 16 Del. C. § 4768. After reviewing Harris's arguments, [35] we disagree.
Harris contends the LIDAR device provides unreliable and untrustworthy distance measurements. Delaware courts have admitted LIDAR distance and speed measurements, after the State offers a trained and certified operator's testimony, and a proper foundation for the testimony. [36] In Jarwan, the trial judge ruled, based on expert testimony, that LIDAR devices provide admissible, relevant, and scientifically reliable speed measurements. [37] Because LIDAR calculates admissible speed measurements, based upon its distance measurement to the target, it follows that a trial judge could reasonably rely upon and admit LIDAR distance measurements. [38] At trial, Stubbs testified to his qualification and operation, and the device's proper calibration and functioning. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion by admitting the LIDAR distance measurement into evidence.
Harris also contends the trial judge erroneously denied his motion for judgment of acquittal of Possession of a Controlled Substance within 300 feet of a Church, because the State failed to establish that Bibleway meets the statutory requirement of a church, synagogue or other place of worship. Harris cites to Florida decisions where the statute required the State to prove that the `church' conducted regular religious activities. [39] Unlike Florida law, however, Delaware law omits statutory language requiring the `church' to regularly conduct religious services. It criminalizes possession of controlled substances within 300 feet of the boundaries ... of [any] church, synagogue or other place of worship. [40] At trial, Davis confirmed the nearby building was a `church' and stated that he had been inside the church to investigate a previous complaint. The building in question displayed a sign that read Bibleway Temple Institutional Church of God and Christ. The State presented sufficient evidence at trial for a rational trier of fact to conclude that the building in question was a `church' as contemplated by 16 Del. C. § 4768(a). The Superior Court did not err by denying Harris's motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of Possession of a Controlled Substance within 300 feet of a Church.