Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Williams v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

January 24, 2014

Dana I. WILLIAMS, Defendant Below, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee.

Submitted: Dec. 31, 2013.

Editorial Note:

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

Court Below— Superior Court of State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID Nos. 0302009660, 0109001783, 9511017952, 9510004645.

Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.

ORDER

JACK B. JACOBS, Justice.

This 24th day of January 2014, upon consideration of the briefs of the parties, the Superior Court records, and the appellee's motion to consolidate and stay briefing schedule, it appears to the Court that:

(1) On January 10, 2013, the appellant, Dana I. Williams, filed an appeal from the Superior Court's December 13, 2012 order denying his motions seeking a correction of sentence, a modification of sentence, and/or credit for time served in Cr. ID Nos. 0109001783, 9511017952, and 9510004645. The appeal, which was assigned No. 678, 2012, was fully briefed and submitted to the Court for decision as of November 8, 2013.

(2) On June 5, 2013, Williams filed an appeal from the Superior Court's May 15, 2013 denial of his motion seeking credit for time served in Cr. ID No. 0302009660. In that appeal, which was assigned No. 291, 2013, Williams filed his opening brief on December 30, 2013.

(3) On December 31, 2013, the State filed a motion to consolidate appeal No. 678, 2012 and appeal No. 291, 2013 on the basis that both appeals concern the issue of credit for time served and, in the interests of judicial economy, would be addressed most efficiently if submitted as one matter. To expedite disposition of the two appeals, the State also asked to stay further briefing in appeal No. 291, 2013 because " repetition of Williams' incarceration and sentence history in a second [answering] brief would be of little assistance to the Court." Having reviewed the records, the State has demonstrated good cause for consolidating the two appeals and for a stay of the briefing in appeal No. 291, 2013.

(4) Turning to the merit of the appeals, the record reflects that, in December 1996, Williams was found guilty of Assault in the Second Degree in Cr. ID No. 9510004645. In January 1997, the Superior Court sentenced Williams to 8 years at Level V suspended after 5 years for decreasing levels of supervision. In April 1997, after the Superior Court amended the 8-year sentence to provide for no suspension of Level V time, Williams filed a motion for correction of an illegal sentence, which was denied by the Superior Court. Rather than appeal the Superior Court's decision, Williams filed an unsuccessful petition for a writ of mandamus in this Court.[1]

(5) In January 1999, a jury convicted Williams of Stalking and Noncompliance with Bond Conditions in Cr. ID No. 9511017952. On March 19, 1999, Williams was sentenced on the stalking conviction to 3 years at Level V. For noncompliance with bond conditions, Williams was sentenced to 5 years at Level V suspended after 4 years for decreasing levels of supervision.

(6) In January 2003, Williams was found guilty of Assault in a Detention Facility and Criminal Mischief in Cr. ID No. 0109001783. Williams was sentenced on the assault conviction to 3 years at Level V suspended after 1 year for decreasing levels of supervision. On the criminal mischief conviction, he was sentenced to 30 days at Level V suspended for 6 months at Level I.

(7) In February 2004, Williams pled guilty to Assault in the Second Degree in Cr. ID No. 0302009660 and was sentenced, on February 27, 2004, to 3 years at Level V. On April 22, 2010, the 3-year sentence was modified ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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