Anderson v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE TYRONE ANDERSON Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 128, 2021 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware Cr. ID No. 1608006981(N) Submitted: October 27, 2021 Decided: October 27, 2021 Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; TRAYNOR, and MONTGOMERY-REEVES, Justices. ORDER This 27th day of October 2021, after careful consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, we find it evident that the final judgment of the Superior Court should be affirmed. Regarding the claim that trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to object to some of the testimony of Detective Mancuso, we affirm solely on the basis of the second prong of the test in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Given the strength of the other evidence the prosecution offered at trial, we conclude that the defendant did not suffer prejudice as defined in Strickland1 as a result of counsel’s failure to object. Otherwise, we affirm on the basis of and for the reasons stated in its April 12, 2021 opinion and order. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Chief Justice 1 See also Sierra v. State, 242 A.3d 563, 572 (Del. 2020). 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.