Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Grossman

Superior Court of Delaware, Kent

June 29, 2018

STATE OF DELAWARE
v.
BRIAN L. GROSSMAN, Defendant.

         RK13-10-0076-01 Drug Dealing (F)

         Upon Defendant's Motion for Postconviction Relief Pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61

          Gregory R. Babowal, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, for the State of Delaware.

          Brian L. Crossman, Pro se.

          COMMISSIONERS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          ANDREA M. FREUD COMMISSIONER.

         The defendant Brian L. Crossman ("Crossman") pled guilty on May 2, 2017 to one count of Drug Dealing, 16 Del. C. § 4754(1). Crossman was also facing another charge of Drug Dealing, two counts of Tier 1 Possession of Meth-amphetamine, one count of Conspiracy in the Second Degree, one count of Endangering the Welfare of a Child, two counts of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia and two counts of Possession of Marijuana. Nolle prosequis were entered by the State in exchange for Grossman's guilty plea. After much negotiation Grossman's attorney was able to get the State to recommend a sentence of eight years Level V suspended after serving nine months with credit for time served. The Court agreed with the recommendation and sentenced Grossman accordingly. Additionally, Grossman's attorney and the State agreed to give Grossman credit for two separate periods of pretrial incarceration while Grossman was held on one matter in lieu of posting bail initially and on a [another?] matter held without bail due to his being arrested for new violent felonies pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 2116(c).

         The charges stemmed from Grossman being found in a vehicle with a large quantity of drugs following a traffic stop for "failing to signal a turn." Inside the vehicle in addition to Crossman and his co-defendant were two children. Grossman was the guardian of one of the children. More drugs were found in a hotel room which Crossman had the key for, following the execution of a search warrant. Also found in the room was a court subpoena with Grossman's name on it. Given this evidence the Plea Agreement that resulted in only a few months additional incarceration was extraordinarily beneficial to Crossman especially in light of the fact that the state's initial plea offer had been for two years incarceration not nine months with credit for time served. Crossman did not appeal his conviction or sentence to the State Supreme Court. He did file several Habeas Corpus motions and a motion for reduction of sentence that this court denied. On July 31 2017, Crossman filed the pending motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61, in which he alleges, in part, ineffective assistance of counsel.

         GROSSMAN'S CONTENTIONS

         In his motion, he raises the following grounds for relief:

Ground one: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel. I never received a discovery after several requests to challenge sufficiencies. I wasn't able to use the protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the DE Constitution. I requested a copy of the indictment, motion to severance, invoke U.S. Const. Amend. 4 & 14.
Ground two: Illegal Detention. Detention lasted hours longer then an illegal detainment should last.
Ground three: Illegal Arrest. The owner of the contraband was already established. Voluntarily (sic) statements were made throughout the course of the incident. I was thoroughly searched and I did not possess anything illegal. I was not wanted and I was not a probationer or fugitive.
Ground four: Illegal Search, I was not on probation; nor did I possess anything illegal. No illegal sells were made from the dwelling where contraband was allegedly found. Consent was not given to search. A traffic stop was used to explore with "hope."
Ground five: Denial of right to confront witness. My proof positive hearing was rescheduled 4-5 times allegedly and never taken place which would have allowed me to compel statements from codefendant which were favorable to my case. I ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.