Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
State v. White
Superior Court of Delaware
July 23, 2018
STATE OF DELAWARE,
DAHMERE WHITE, Defendant.
Submitted: July 12, 2018
ORDER DENYING THIRD MOTION TO MODIFY
R. Wallace, Judge.
23rd day of June, 2018, upon consideration of the
Defendant's Third Motion for Sentence Modification (D.I.
14), and the record in this matter, it appears to the Court
(1) Defendant Dahmere White was before the Court for
sentencing after having earlier pleaded guilty to a charge of
Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony
("PFDCF"). At his September 30, 2016 sentencing
hearing, Mr. White was sentenced to serve: effective February
23, 2016, three years at Level V, followed by six months at
Supervision Level IV-DOC Discretion, and then two years at
Supervision Level III.
(2) Mr. White filed an unsuccessful motion to try to reduce
his term of imprisonment in December 20 16. He then filed a
second motion under Superior Court Criminal Rule
35(b) in April 2018 requesting elimination of
his Level IV term and reduction of Level III term to Level
His request was based, in part, on his claims of familial
hardship, rehabilitation, educational efforts and relocation
prospects. That motion was denied.
(3) Mr. White has now filed the present motion under Rule
35(b) requesting again that his term of Level IV supervision
be eliminated and his Level III term reduced. In short, Mr.
White requests that he spend no time at Level IV. This relief
is appropriate, he suggests, for the same reasons he cited
three months ago: (1) his rehabilitative efforts; (2) his
family's hardship; (3) his employment/relocation
prospects; and (4) his acceptance of
(4) The Court may consider Mr. White's motion
"without presentation, hearing or
argument." The Court will decide his motion on the
papers filed and the complete sentencing record in Mr.
(5) When considering motions for sentence modification, this
Court addresses any applicable procedural bars before turning
to the merits. Mr. White does not address those bars to
consideration of his Rule 35(b) motion. The Court must. While
Mr. White's entreaty - one seeking modification of a term
of partial confinement or probation - is not subject to Rule
35's 90-day time bar,  it can and should be denied
because it is repetitive.
(6) As noted, Mr. White previously filed an unsuccessful
application to reduce or modify his sentence. As our
Supreme Court and this Court have consistently held, Rule
35(b) prohibits consideration of repetitive requests for
sentence reduction or modification. There is no exception to
the repetitive motion bar. And the repetitive motion bar
is applicable even when the request is for reduction or
modification of a term of partial confinement or
THEREFORE, the Court DENIES Dahmere White's Rule 35(b)
motion for reduction of sentence.
 Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, §§
1447A(a) and (b), 4205(b)(2) (2015) (PFDCF is a class B
felony for which one must serve at least three years of
Buy This Entire Record For