The Delaware Supreme Court held that the trial attorney for convicted murderer Mark Purnell should have requested a jury instruction regarding the credibility of accomplice testimony, a so-called Bland instruction. However, the court declined to overturn Purnell’s conviction, ruling the error did not prejudice the jury because it received general instructions regarding witness motivation and bias.
“We do not find that there is a reasonable probability that the jury’s verdict would have changed had it heard the Bland instruction,” said Justice Karen Valihura in Purnell v. State. “Thus, Purnell has not met his burden to show prejudice as required by the second prong under Strickland v. Washington.”
