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. Green

Superior Court of Delaware

September 19, 2019

STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff,
v.
SEAN R. GREEN, Defendant.

          Submitted: August 8, 2019

         COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR POSTCONVICTION RELIEF SHOULD BE SUMMARILY DISMISSED

          Matthew C. Bloom, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware, Attorney for the State.

          Sean R. Green, Howard R. Young Correctional Center, Wilmington, Delaware, pro se.

          PARKER, COMMISSIONER

         This 19th day of September 2019, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion for Postconviction Relief, it appears to the Court that:

         BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         1. On November 25, 2013, Defendant Sean Green was indicted on six charges stemming from incidents that occurred on October 3, 2013. There were three charges stemming from an attempted robbery (Attempted Robbery First Degree, Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony, and Conspiracy Second Degree). These charges were subsequently dropped. The three remaining charges, unrelated to the robbery charges, involved gun related charges: Carrying a Concealed Deadly Weapon ("CCDW"), Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited ("PFBPP"), and Possession of Ammunition by a Person Prohibited ("PABPP").

         2. On May 21, 2014, a Superior Court jury found Green guilty of the three gun related charges: CCDW, PFBPP, and PABPP. Defendant was sentenced to a total of twenty-six years of Level V incarceration, suspended after eleven years, for decreasing levels of supervision.

         3. Green filed a direct appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court. On July 14, 2015, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence of the Superior Court.[1]

         4. On January 19, 2016, Green filed a Motion for Correction of Illegal Sentence and on January 22, 2016, Green filed a Motion for Sentence Reduction. By Order dated May 18, 2016, the court denied Green's motions for sentence modifications concluding that the sentence was appropriate for all the reasons stated at the time of sentencing.[2]

         5. On January 19, 2016, Green filed his first motion for postconviction relief. In his first Rule 61 motion for postconviction relief, Green raised a number of claims including ineffective assistance of counsel claims, alleged trial court errors, and alleged shortcomings and deficiencies by the State.

         6. The Superior Court Commissioner conducted a full, thorough and detailed review of Green's claims raised in his first Rule 61 motion. The record was expanded and trial counsel filed an affidavit in response to the allegations of ineffectiveness, the State filed a response to Green's motion, and Green filed a reply thereto. Following that careful review, the Superior Court Commissioner recommended the denial of Green's Rule 61 motion.[3]

         7. After conducting a careful and de novo review of the record and the Commissioner's Report and Recommendation recommending the denial of Green's motion, the Superior Court adopted the Commissioner's Report and Recommendation and denied Green's Rule 61 motion.[4]

         8. Thereafter, on July 18, 2019, Green filed a motion to modify his Level V sentence. By Order dated July 26, 2019, the Superior Court denied the motion finding that the sentence was appropriate for all the reasons stated at the time of sentencing.[5]

         GREEN'S ...


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.