Coleman v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AKEEM COLEMAN, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 208, 2004 Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County No. 0210008663 Submitted: February 18, 2005 Decided: April 11, 2005 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices. ORDER This 11th day of April 2005, on consideration of the briefs of the parties, it appears to the Court that: (1) The defendant-appellant, Akeem Coleman and co-defendants, Mustafa Whitfield and Emmanuel Robinson, were jointly indicted on the following charges: (i) attempted robbery in the first degree; (ii) assault in the second degree; (iii) reckless endangering in the first degree; (iv) wearing a disguise during the commission of a felony; (v) conspiracy in the second degree; (vi) possession of a deadly weapon by a person prohibited; and (vii) three counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Following a joint jury trial in the Superior Court, all of the defendants were convicted on all of the charges except for one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony and possession of a deadly weapon by a person prohibited, as to which all defendants were found not guilty. (2) Coleman raises three arguments in support of his direct appeal. However, we have previously rejected those very same arguments in co-defendant Whitfield s direct appeal to this Court.1 Moreover, both parties now agree that our decision in Whitfield is controlling authority in the present appeal. We therefore reject Coleman s appellate arguments on the basis of our reasoning in Whitfield. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgments of conviction against Akeem Coleman entered by the Superior Court are AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/Henry duPont Ridgely Justice 1 Whitfield v. State, 867 A.2d 168 (Del. 2004). 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
