Submitted: June 12, 2018
Defendant's Eleventh Motion for Postconviction Relief.
Defendant's Motion to Amend. DENIED
Defendant's "Motion For Recuse." DENIED
Gregory E. Smith, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General,
Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for the
Christopher R. Desmond, James T. Vaughn Correctional
Institution, Smyrna, Delaware, pro se.
RICHARD R. COOCH, J.
10th day of July 2018, upon consideration of Defendant's
Eleventh Motion for Postconviction Relief, it appears to the
1. Defendant was convicted in November 1992 of Robbery First
Degree and related crimes. The factual and procedural history
of both the case and the "plethora" of subsequent
postconviction actions are incorporated by reference from the
Court's opinion issued January 5, 2011. For an overview
of Defendant's first six motions for postconviction
relief, see State v. Desmond, 2011 WL 91984 (Del.
Super. Ct. Jan. 5, 2011). In that opinion, the Court
procedurally barred Defendant's seventh motion for
postconviction relief by determining that Defendant's
claims were not asserted in prior proceedings or were
2. Subsequently, this Court summarily dismissed
Defendant's eighth motion for postconviction relief on
March 7, 2012, finding that Defendant's eighth motion was
procedurally barred. The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed that
decision on August 9, 2012.
3. On February 26, 2013, this Court denied Defendant's
ninth motion for postconviction relief as procedurally barred
as untimely and repetitive.As a consequence, Defendant's
motion for appointment of counsel was denied as moot.
4. In 2014, this Court deemed three filings listed below to
be "subsequent motions pursuant to Superior Court
Criminal Rule 61 for Postconviction
1. October 7, 2013: Motion to Amend Defendant's
Correction of Illegal Sentence.
2. October 14, 2013: Motion to Amend Original Dismissal
Motion DI29, DI 31 Pursuant [sic] Superior Court Civil Rule
15(c), (d) and Superior Court Criminal Rules of Procedure
3. October 14, 2013: Motion to Amend Pursuant to the Superior
Court Criminal Rule 61(e) and 61(b)(6) Appointment of Counsel
for the Unresolved D.I. 64.
As a result, this Court denied the motions (interpreted as
the tenth motion for postconviction relief) as repetitive
pursuant to Rule 61 (i)(2) and procedurally ...