Bussey v. State ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    TYRONE BUSSEY, §
    § No. 224, 2016
    Defendant Below- §
    Appellant, § Court Below: Superior Court
    § of the State of Delaware
    v. §
    §
    STATE OF DELAWARE, § ID No. 1503013837A
    §
    Plaintiff Below- §
    Appellee. §
    Submitted: March 15, 2017
    Decided: March 31, 2017
    Before STRINE, Chief Justice; HOLLAND and VAUGHN, Justices.
    0 R D E R
    On this 315‘ day of March 2017, upon consideration of the parties’ briefs and
    the record of the case, it appears that:
    (1) Appellant, Tyrone Bussey, appeals from a Superior Court jury verdict
    finding him guilty of numerous charges stemming from a domestic disturbance
    Bussey makes one claim on appeal. He contends that the trial court abused its
    discretion in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on the following counts
    of the indictment two charges of Aggravating Menacing, two charges of Possession
    of a Firearrn During the Commission of a Felony (“PFDCF”), and three counts of
    Endangering the Welfare of a Child.
    (2) On March 21, 2015, police officers Were dispatched to 410 West 7th
    Street, Laurel, Delaware, for a call related to a domestic disturbance. A 911 call
    from neighbors, Doris Taylor and Tyreshia Taylor, gave law enforcement a
    description of the incident Doris Taylor resided across the street diagonally from
    the victim’s home. Doris informed police that the victim, Kolanda Shelton, was
    involved in a physical altercation with a male.
    (3) Shelton spoke to a first responder on the scene and another officer after
    she was transported to the hospital. On the day of the incident, Shelton Was involved
    in a physical altercation with her boyfriend, Tyrone Bussey. The argument started
    because Shelton did not have the television repaired. Shelton told the first responder
    that Bussey punched her in the face and held a gun to her head. He also threatened
    to kill her. She ti.lrther stated that when Bussey heard the police coming, he threw
    the gun and took off running. Shelton said that Bussey retrieved the gun from behind
    or in the vicinity of the television. Shelton told the officer that she was not aware
    that there were any weapons in the residence.
    (4) From there, Shelton told her oldest son, Windonald Paul, Jr. (“Paul”), to
    run to the neighbors for help. At that point, Bussey pointed the gun at Shelton’s son
    and threatened to kill both of them if the police arrived. After Paul exited the
    residence to get help, Bussey put the gun in his Waistband and ordered Shelton
    outside. Shelton told the officer that she ran out the door in an effort to get away
    from Bussey, but he grabbed her and threw her down. She believed Bussey pointed
    the gun at her and threatened to kill her again. Next, Bussey ordered Shelton to go
    to the backyard of the residence, but Shelton refused, When asked why she refused,
    Shelton stated that she thought Bussey was going to kill her. Frorn there, Bussey
    dragged Shelton to the rear of the property. After hearing the police arrive, Bussey
    threw the gun and ran from the scene.
    (5) As his mother was being transported to the hospital, an officer spoke to
    Shelton’s son, Paul. Paul voluntarily provided a statement to police. He stated that
    he witnessed his mother and Bussey engaged in a verbal argument Frorn there, Paul
    observed Bussey punch his mother in the face and retrieve a gun from behind the
    television. Paul explained to the officer that his mother told him to leave the house
    and go get help. He stated that Bussey pointed the gun at him and told him that if
    the police came Bussey was going to kill him and his mother. Paul told the officer
    that he ran across the street and told a neighbor to call the police.
    (6) After arriving on the scene, the police were able to locate a gun in a pot
    next to the stairs to the backdoor. That evening, Bussey Was apprehended by police.
    He was brought in front of the Justice of Peace and a no-contact order was issued on
    March 22, 2015. The no-contact order was signed by the defendant Specifically,
    the no-contact order prohibited Bussey from having contact with Shelton, Paul, and
    Shelton’s three other children.
    (7) Despite the no-contact order, Bussey made contact With Shelton via the
    telephone and mail while he was in jail. He used another inmate’s state bureau
    identification number to place the calls to Shelton. There were a “total of 26 phone
    calls to . . . Shelton’s number from Donald Flower’s phone account” between March
    21, 2015 and June 21, 2015.' During these phone calls, Bussey attempted to tell
    Shelton what to do in relation to the pending criminal charges against him. “Just
    make sure you don’t come no matter what, you feel me? I might have to take this s-
    3)2
    -t all the way. He instructed Shelton, “[i]f they call you to trial, just tell them you
    -just drop it, you feel me? Tell them what you told the lawyer or whatever.”3
    (8) In a series of phone calls played during the trial, Bussey and Shelton
    discussed the case. In the first call, Bussey confronted Shelton because he heard that
    Shelton told the police where to find the gun. Shelton responded that she “didn’t
    even know where [he] set it at.”4 From there, Bussey stated that the police or the
    State were going to try to scare her and “that she shouldn’t pay any mind to that
    because they can’t do s--t.”5
    (9) In the second call entered into evidence, Bussey told Shelton that “the
    only evidence [the State] had against him was her and her son Paul’s statements
    about the gun.”6 He asked Shelton to bail him out of jail because he needed to get
    out of jail to better explain things to Shelton. A synopsis of the other phone calls
    ' App. to Appellee’s Answering Br. at 65.
    2 ]d. at 67.
    3 
    Id. 4 Id.
    at 68.
    5 
    Id. 6 ]d.
    shows that Shelton set up an appointment with Bussey’s attorney to tell him that her
    son’s statement to police was not correct. In the next call, Bussey told Shelton that
    “she wouldn’t get in very much trouble if she changed her story.”7 He again stated
    that he needed to get out of jail so that he can speak to her. He stated, “[h]ave your
    ass go in there prepared and know what the f--k you got to do, you feel me?”8 In
    that same call, Bussey told Shelton, “[you can’t] be charged with perjury because
    [you weren’t] under oath when [you] gave [your] statement to the police.”9
    (10) In another call where Bussey and Shelton discussed Shelton’s upcoming
    meeting with his attorney, he stated, “[a]bout tomorrow, make sure you go in there
    and, you feel me, your whole main focus isjust, l never had s--t, you feel me? All
    the other s--t about your son and all that, none of that ever happened.”'0 Shelton, in
    discussing the gun, said, “[a]nd that could be, like, that was my gun and I put it back
    there fixing to try and plant it on you.”ll
    (l 1) In a sixth call, Bussey and Shelton discussed her revised statement that
    she gave to Bussey’s attorney. Shelton read Bussey her new statement over the
    phone. Shelton further told Bussey, “I didn’t know what the hell to say. I was just -
    - I was just, like - - anything to take the gun attention off of you.”'2 During the last
    7 
    Id. at 71.
    8 
    Id. 9 Id.
    m ld. 3172-73.
    ll 
    Id. at 74.
    '2 ld. at 75-76.
    call played for the jury, Bussey continued to encourage Shelton not to press the
    charges
    (12) At trial, both Shelton and Paul’s testimony differed from their original
    statements Shelton testified that she lied about Bussey’s use of`` a gun in order to get
    Bussey in trouble for hitting her. She further stated that she accidentally fell and
    that Bussey “was still walking, pulling me, tugging away from me, and I was just
    holding him.”13 She denied that once outside of her residence that Bussey hit her or
    physically dragged her. She stated that she followed Bussey around the house as he
    walked away.
    (13) Shelton testified that after Bussey left the premises, she went back into
    her home, retrieved the handgun, came back outside, “tossed the gun and ran out
    towards police.”14 When asked where she got the gun, Shelton stated that she found
    the gun at Laurel Park and brought it home at an earlier date. She stated that Bussey
    told her to get rid of the weapon, but she had not done so before this incident. She
    stated that she planted the gun outside of her home to get Bussey into trouble.
    (14) Paul testified that he did not know why the police came to his residence
    on the day of`` the incident He said that his mother told him to go across the street to
    call 911. Paul claimed that he was telling the truth when he spoke with officers on
    the day of the incident, but testified that he did not tell the police that he saw a gun.
    13 App. to Appellant’s Opening Br. at 018.
    '4 
    Id. at 025.
    (15) During the trial, Tyreshia and Doris Taylor testified for the State.
    Tyreshia stated that on the night of`` the incident, Paul came to her grandmother,
    Doris’, house and said that his mother wanted him to call the police, Doris asked
    Paul if he was serious, and Paul called to his mother to confirm that she wanted him
    to call the police. Shelton confirmed she wanted the police called, and Doris called
    the police, Tyreshia testified that Paul went back to his mom and Shelton made him
    go back to Doris’ house. Next, Tyreshia testified that she observed Shelton arguing
    with a man and stated that there “was a lot of hand motions and yelling.”15 After
    that, Tyreshia testified that she saw a man pull out a gun and that he was holding it
    towards Shelton’s face. She also saw the man strike Shelton and drag her around to
    the back of her residence
    (16) Doris testified to generally the same information as Tyreshia. She stated
    that when she asked Paul if he was sure his mother wanted her to ca11 the police,
    Paul squatted behind a car and called over to his mom to confirm. Doris stated that
    there is “a big tree sitting there, and he was down in between them where he didn’t
    want to be seen.”16 From there, Doris called 91 1 while she stayed on the porch. She
    testified that Tyreshia was calling out her observations and that she relayed the
    information to the 911 operator. She stated that the next time she looked up, she
    '5 App. to Appellee’s Answering Br. at 28.
    "’ App. to Appellant’s Opening Br. at 047. Doris further stated that Paul called over to his mother
    is a low voice. 
    Id. 7 observed
    Shelton being dragged to the back of her home. In addition, Doris testified
    that she saw Shelton’s two daughters standing at the upstairs window while the
    altercation was going on. On cross, Doris stated that she had not actually seen the
    gun herself.
    (17) At the close of the State’s case, Bussey moved for ajudgment of acquittal
    as to counts one, two, three, four, nine, ten, and eleven. The Court formally denied
    the motion as to counts one through four, The trial judge chose to reserve judgment
    on the motion as to counts nine through eleven. The trial judge never formally ruled
    on the motion.
    (18) This Court reviews an appeal from the denial of`` a motion forjudgment
    of acquittal de novo." Specifically, this court examines “whether any rational trier
    of fact, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, could find a
    defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of all the elements of the crime.”'8
    (19) On appeal, Bussey contends that the trial court abused its discretion in
    denying his motion for judgment of acquittal on specific counts in the indictment
    Bussey claims that the State did not meet its burden for the following charges:
    Aggravated Menacing of Paul, Aggravated Menacing of Kolanda Shelton, two
    counts of Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony related to the
    Aggravated Menacing charges, and three counts of Endangering the Welfare of a
    17 Cline v. Stare, 
    720 A.2d 891
    , 892 (Del. 1998).
    |8 Id
    8
    Child. There is no merit to Bussey’s argument, and therefore, thejury verdict should
    be affirmed
    (20) In a jury trial, it is “the duty of the jury to determine if the State ha[s]
    proved each necessary element of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and, in
    making such determination, it does not have to accept the total testimony of one
    3519 ct
    witness. [T]he jury is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and
    responsible for resolving conflicts in the testimony.”20
    (21) “A person is guilty of aggravated menacing when by displaying what
    appears to be a deadly weapon that person intentionally places another person in fear
    of imminent physical injury.”z' Bussey claims that because both Shelton and Paul
    testified at trial that Bussey did not have a gun during the altercation, and because
    no evidence was introduced about whether they were “in fear of imminent physical
    injury,” the State did not meet its burden in proving the Aggravated Menacing
    charges.22
    (22) Over the course of the trial, the jury was presented with conflicting
    testimony as to what happened on June 22, 2015. Shelton and Paul gave testimony
    that differed from their original statements, which they provided separately to police.
    Namely, at trial, Shelton contended that she had made up the majority of her original
    19 Tyre v. State, 
    412 A.2d 326
    , 330 (Del. 1980).
    20 ]d
    2' 11 net C. §602.
    22 ]d.
    statement to police, and Paul claimed that he did not remember what he told police
    about the night of the incident. While on the stand, Paul distinctly stated that he
    never told the police about a gun and that he had not seen a gun that evening. The
    State introduced Shelton and Paul’s prior statements from the night of the incident
    pursuant to ll Del. C. § 3507.23 In addition to the § 3507 statements, the State
    presented evidence of Bussey’s contact with Shelton, despite the no-contact order,
    via the recordings of their telephone conversations These calls show the
    development of what became Shelton’s trial testimony.
    (23) Although conflicting evidence was presented at trial, the State did
    present sufficient evidence to sustain a guilty verdict as to the Aggravated Menacing
    charges. In the §3507 statements presented at trial, both Shelton and Paul told the
    police that Bussey pointed a gun at them and threatened to kill both of them if the
    police arrived. As the trier of fact, the jury had the sole responsibility for resolving
    conflicts in the testimony presented and determining the credibility of each witness.
    It is clear based on the verdict that the jury found Shelton and Paul’s original
    statements to police, coupled with other testimonial evidence, to be more credible
    than their trial testimony. In determining that Shelton and Paul’s original statements
    were credible, thejury could have reasonably inferred that when an individual’s life
    is threatened with a gun that individual may be afraid. Therefore, in viewing the
    23 ll Del. C. §3507(3).
    10
    evidence in the light most favorable to the State, a rational trier of fact could have
    found Bussey guilty of Aggravated Menacing as to both Shelton and Paul.
    (24) For the same reasons as above, Bussey’s claim that the State did not
    present sufficient evidence to prove the Possession of a Firearm During the
    Commission of a Felony charges lacks merit. From the evidence presented, a
    rational juror could conclude that Bussey was in the possession of a firearm during
    the commission of a felony (Aggravated Menacing). Again, a rational jury could
    determine that Shelton and Paul’s prior statements to police that Bussey had a gun
    were more credible than their trial testimony. Additionally, Tyreshia Taylor testified
    that she saw a man with a gun at Shelton’s house. Therefore, Bussey’s claim lacks
    merit.
    (25) Lastly, Bussey argues that the State presented insufficient evidence to
    sustain a guilty verdict for three counts of Endangering the Welfare of a Child.24 “A
    person is guilty of endangering the welfare of a child when . . . [t]he person commits
    any violent felony . . . knowing that such [act] was witnessed, either by sight or
    sound, by a child less than 18 years of age who is a member of the person’s family
    or the victim’s family.”25 In his opening brief, Bussey argues that “no evidence
    [was] presented via [§] 3507 statements nor witness testimony that the children, saw
    24111)¢31.€. § 1102.
    15 1a
    n
    nor hear[d] the altercation.”26 However, Doris Taylor provided testimony that she
    saw at least two of the three children in the window of the residence as the altercation
    between Shelton and Bussey was going on. In addition, segments of Shelton and
    Paul’s testimony supported a finding that all three other children witnessed, “either
    by sight or sound,”"” the underlying felony.
    (26) During cross-examination, Shelton stated that the children were upstairs
    at the time of the altercation and said that she was “pretty sure they w[ere] sleeping
    because [she] didn’t hear any sounds.”23 During direct, Paul stated his brothers and
    sisters were upstairs when the altercation started and that they were “on their way to
    sleep.”zg During the motion for judgment of acquittal, the State argued that Paul
    testified to going back up to bedroom after returning home from the Taylor
    residence In discussing the size of her home, Shelton stated that the home was two
    stories and was “not really” a big house.30 She stated that all four children shared a
    bedroom and that the room was positioned on the front of the house and had a
    window in it.
    (27) Taking the above testimony as a whole and looking at it in the light most
    favorable to the State, a rational trier of fact could have determined that the State
    26 Appellant’s Opening Br. at 15.
    21 
    11 Del. C
    . § 1102(3)(4).
    28 App. to Appellant’s Opening Br. at 032.
    29 
    Id. at 038.
    30 App. to Appellee’s Answering Br. at 45.
    ll
    proved each element of the offense. Taylor’s testimony established that two of
    Shelton’s children were looking out the window during the altercation.
    Additionally, the size of the house as well as the position of the children’s room on
    the front of the house supports the reasonable inference that all of the children saw
    or heard the altercation. While Shelton and Paul contend that the children were in
    varying states of going to sleep at the time of the incident, it is reasonable to assume
    that if Paul could hear his mother from the room, the other children could hear the
    altercation as well. Thus, the Superior Court did not err in implicitly denying
    Bussey’s motion for judgment of acquittal as to the Endangering the Welfare of a
    Child charges.
    NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS TI-IE ORDER of the Court that the judgement
    of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.
    BY Tl-[E COURT:
    Slm/ bel/lp
    §§
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 224, 2016

Judges: Vaughn, J.

Filed Date: 3/31/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/3/2017