Brown Brokerage Co. v. Greely Plumbing Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the DelaWare gang participation statute Was not unconstitutionally vague and that the Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in allowing a rap video to be played for the jury, among other issues
• holding the jury was presumed to have been able to understand and comply with a limiting instruction
• denying Defendant’s challenge that the gang participation statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, as well as evidentiary challenges and a review of this Court’s denial of a motion to sever
• “A challenge to the credibility of the witness who heard the statements goes to the weight to be accorded to that evidence by the [factfinder], not to its admissibility.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• evidence of gang affiliation was inextricably intertwined with defendant’s violent crimes because omission would have precluded evidence of motive, making them seem like “random acts.” (citing Younger v. State, 496 A.2d 546, 550 (Del. 1985))
• jurors are presumed to follow limiting instructions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).