State of Delaware v. Brown.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE E. SCOTT BRADLEY P.O. Box 746 COURTHOU SE GEORGETO WN, DE 19947 JUDGE July 30, 2004 Julian Brown Delaware Correctional Center 1181 Paddock Road Smyrna, DE 19977 RE: State v. Brown, Def. ID# 0207001618 DATE SUBMITTED: June 15, 2004 Dear Mr. Brown: Pending before the Court is the motion of defendant Julian Brown ( defendant ) seeking postconviction relief. What defendant actually requests is that a portion of his sentence be corrected pursuant to Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(a). Accordingly, I will treat the motion as one for correction of an illegal sentence. On July11, 2003, defendant pled guilty to two counts of rape in the third degree, and was sentenced thereon. A condition of the plea agreement was that he pay the costs of extradition. The Court imposed extradition costs of $433.14. Defendant now argues that the imposition of the extradition costs was unconstitutional. He argues no other people who have been brought back to Delaware have had to pay these costs and the State of Delaware has funds to cover these costs. 1 He asserts the imposition of the fee constitutes equal protection, ex post facto, and due process violations. The requirement that the defendant pay costs of extradition is statutory. 11 Del. C. § 2524(b).1 Acts of the General Assembly are presumed to be constitutional. Helman v. State, 784 A.2d 1058, 1068 (Del. 2001). A person attacking the constitutionality of a statute has the burden of demonstrating its invalidity. Id. In this case, defendant makes conclusory assertions of unconstitutionality. His contention that others who are extradited do not have to pay an extradition fee is factually incorrect. Defendant has not attempted to meet his burden in this matter, and his claim fails. For the foregoing reasons, defendant s attack on the portion of his sentence which imposes a fee for extradition costs is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Very truly yours, E. Scott Bradley cc: Prothonotary s Office James Adkins, Esquire E. Stephen Callaway, Esquire 1 In 11 Del. C. § 2524(b), it is provided as follows: Upon the conviction of any individual returned to this State by requisition proceedings, the court shall assess the costs of requisition in the same manner as other costs of the case. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
