State of Delaware v. Gibson.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Superior Court of the State of Delaware Jan R. Jurden New Castle County Courthouse 500 North King Street, Suite 10400 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-3733 Telephone (302) 255-0665 Judge Date Submitted: September 5, 2008 Bench Ruling Issued: September 5, 2008 Written Decision: September 8, 2008 Date Amended: September 9, 2008 Allison L. Texter, Esq. Department of Justice State Office Building 820 N. French Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Brian J. Chapman, Esq. The Law Office of Brian J. Chapman 1232 N. King Street, Suite 300 Wilmington, DE 19801 RE: State of Delaware v. Tyrone Gibson, ID# 0602015743 Upon Defendant s Motion to Suppress - GRANTED Dear Counsel: The Court has previously ruled that the defendant s statement was obtained in violation of Miranda. In follow up to the Court's comments and bench ruling on Friday, September 5, 2008, the Court holds that the State may not use Mr. Gibson's statement for impeachment purposes should Mr. Gibson testify at trial. Given all the circumstances, the Court is not satisfied that Mr. Gibson's statement was voluntary, and the Court is also not satisfied that the statement is trustworthy. See Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (1978); Foraker v. State, 394 A.2d 208 (Del. 1978). Mr. Gibson's documented mental retardation and cognitive limitations (noted in great detail by experts for the State and the defense), his lack of a high school degree, and his lack of prior dealings with the police, coupled with the custodial setting and the interrogator's comment telling Gibson he had to tell her what happened, render his statement involuntary - not the product of his "free and rational choice." See also Mental Health Status and Vulnerability to Police Use of Mr. Gibson's Interrogation Tactics, CRIM. JUST. Fall 2007, at 5-7. statement for any purpose under these circumstances would be a denial of due process of law. Page 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Jan R. Jurden, Judge cc: Prothonotary Original Allison L. Texter, Esq. Brian J. Chapman, Esq.
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.
