Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Whitfield v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

December 13, 2013

Mustafa WHITFIELD, Defendant Below, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee.

Submitted: Dec. 2, 2013.

Editorial Note:

This decision has been designated as "Table of Decisions Without Published Opinions." in the Atlantic Reporter.

Court Below— Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID No. 0210009174.

Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.

ORDER

RANDY J. HOLLAND, Justice.

This 13th day of December 2013, it appears to the Court that:

(1) On August 15, 2013, the appellant, Mustafa Whitfield, was charged in the Superior Court with violation of probation (" VOP" ) in Cr. ID No. 0210009174. On October 1, 2013, Whitfield filed a notice of appeal stating that he " intends to appeal" the August 30, 2013 " conviction of guilt" in that case. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the Clerk issued a notice directing that Whitfield show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed due to the Court's lack of jurisdiction to entertain a criminal interlocutory appeal.[1]

(2) On October 28, 2013, Whitfield filed a response to the notice to show cause, and on December 2, 2013, the State filed an answer to Whitfield's response. In its answer, the State informs the Court that the August 30, 2013 VOP hearing in Whitfield's case was continued until November 22, 2013. On that date, Whitfield was adjudged guilty of VOP and sentenced to two years and eleven months at Level V suspended after 104 days for two years of probation.

(3) Under the Delaware Constitution, only a final judgment may be reviewed by this Court in a criminal case.[2] A criminal conviction does not become final, and this Court does not, therefore, have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from that conviction, until sentence is imposed.[3] Because Whitfield had not yet been sentenced October 1, 2013 when he filed his notice of appeal, his appeal is interlocutory, and this Court has no jurisdiction to consider it.[4]

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED.

Del.Supr.,2013.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.