discussed Cited as authority (rule) Burton v. State C. § 4214 (providing for sentencing as an habitual criminal). [2] Burton v. State, 907 A.2d 145 , 2006 WL 2434914, at *1 (Del. 2006) (Table). [3] Burton claimed that: (1) the indictment was illegal; (2) a Batson violation had occurred; (3) a juror had misled the Superior Court during voir dire ; (4) a juror drank alcohol during the trial; (5) Burton was not allowed to testify; (6) Burton was not allowed to call witnesses; (7) prosecutorial misconduct occurred; (8) his sentence was illegal; (9) his trial counsel was ineffective; and (10) his trial counsel failed to interview and call material …

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Morales-Garcia v. State The prosecutor’s intentional admission of inadmissible evidence violated prosecutorial standards.78 When assessing the propriety of a prosecutor’s trial tactics, we have been guided by American Bar Association standards.79 We previously adopted a portion of Standard 3–6.6 (“Presentation of Evidence”), which 76 Id. at 450–51. 77 United States v. Gambino, 926 F.2d 1355 , 1363 (3d Cir. 1991) (quoting Bisaccia v. Attorney General of New Jersey, 623 F.2d 307, 312 (3d Cir. 1980)) (citation modified). 78 Allen, 878 A.2d at 450. 79 Watson v. State, 303 A.3d 37 , 44–45 (Del. 2023); see al…