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.

State v. Harden

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle

December 29, 2017

State of Delaware
v.
Lamont Harden

          Submitted: October 5, 2017

         On Defendant's "Amended Motion for Modification of Sentence." DENIED.

          Brian J. Robertson, Esquire Deputy Attorney General Department of Justice

          Monika G. Germono, Esquire Assistant Public Defender Office of Defense Services

         Dear Counsel:

         Defendant seeks review pursuant to 11 Del. C. §4204A(d)(1) and Superior Court Criminal Rule 35A of his thirty-two-year sentence imposed in 1998 for the 1995 rape and beating murder of his nine-year-old victim. He is presently serving thirty-two years at Level V under sentences for Murder Second Degree and Unlawful Sexual Intercourse Second Degree. The crimes were committed when Defendant was fifteen years of age. As Defendant has served twenty years of his sentence, he is statutorily entitled to petition for a review of his sentence. He requests a sentencing hearing.

          Defendant's counsel has done admirable work in assembling a very thorough and comprehensive motion seeking a sentence reduction. Among numerous supporting documents are an August 28, 2017 letter from Kathleen Covelli-Reyes, M.Ed, advising that Defendant "presented as a very polite, but timid young man when he first entered the NCCD, " "then went on to be a model resident, " "showing tremendous growth emotional, physically, and academically." She supports a reduction of sentence and the preparation of a "comprehensive re-entry plan that will afford him an opportunity to live a productive life in the community." (Exhibit D to Motion).

         Allison McGonigal, Director of Division Management Support Services of the Department of Services for Youth and Their Families, submitted a letter dated August 2017 on Defendant's behalf. She was his case manager while at the detention center. Among other things she said that "Lamont is a quiet leader by example, and probably the only resident who could acquire positive feedback from every staff member in the building." She added, "I am confident had his arrest and subsequent proceedings occurred today, the outcome would have been dramatically different given his age, social history, our knowledge of the impact of adverse childhood experiences, and evidence-based practice and research on adolescent brain development." (Exhibit E to Motion).

         While at the Department of Corrections, Defendant has been consistently placed at the minimum security level since 2009 and has a relatively minimal disciplinary record. He has consistently held a job while incarcerated and has been pursued job related programs such as masonry and ServSafe certification to assist in employment beyond prison walls. While incarcerated, he has completed and obtained 31 certificates and programs, and has earned his high school diploma. (Motion at ¶ 37-38).

         Defendant has expressed "regret and remorse" for his actions in the taking of the victim's life. (Exhibit C to Motion).

         Defendant had a very dysfunctional upbringing, having lived alternatively with his mother, father, and in different foster homes. Both parents inflicted emotional and physical abuse upon him. Both parents were addicted to drugs.

         Defendant had no prior significant adjudications of delinquency.

         The State, in response, acknowledges the applicability of various mitigating factors, (some of which are identified by the court in this letter). However, the State points out the "ghastly nature" of the crime. As noted by the State:

"The injuries inflicted upon [the victim] were nothing short of horrific. His skull was fractured in several places. His gums were torn away from his upper teeth and his lower teeth were bent inward. The child had been anally raped, as evidenced by the medical examiner's findings of traumatic anal penetration consisting with intercourse. The medical examiner also interpreted petechial hemorrhages ...

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.