Matter of Paczkowski
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF JOSEPH S. PACZKOWSKI FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. No. 371, 2000 Submitted: August 15, 2000 Decided: September 20, 2000 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and HOLLAND, Justices. ORDER This 20th day of September 2000, upon consideration of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Joseph S. Paczkowski and the answer and motion to dismiss filed by the State of Delaware, it appears to the Court that: (1) In August 1999, Joseph S. Paczkowski entered a Robinson plea in the Superior Court to one count of Third Degree Unlawful Sexual Intercourse.1 Paczkowski was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, suspended after a minimum mandatory term of 2 years for 15 years probation.2 (2) Paczkowski has filed two motions for post-conviction relief. The Superior Court denied the motions in April 2000 and August 2000, respectively. In August 2000, the Superior Court also denied Paczkowski=s motion to 1 Robinson v. State, Del. Supr., 291 A.2d 279 (1972) (permitting Superior Court to accept guilty plea where guilt of offense charged is not admitted). 2 State v. Paczkowski, Del. Super., Cr.A.No. S99-05-0080, Stokes, J. (Aug. 19, 1999) (ORDER). withdraw his guilty plea. Paczkowski has not filed an appeal from any of those decisions. Paczkowski has, however, filed a timely appeal from the Superior Court=s August 7 denial of Paczkowski=s petition for a writ of habeas in that court. The appeal is proceeding as Paczkowski v. State, Del. Supr., No. 455, 2000. (3) On July 28, 2000, Paczkowski filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in this Court. Paczkowski attached to his petition a copy of the medical report of the victim=s physical examination. Paczkowski claims that the medical report is newly-discovered evidence that establishes his innocence. The State has filed an answer and motion to dismiss Paczkowski=s habeas corpus petition for lack of jurisdiction. (4) Under Article IV, ' 11(6) of the Delaware Constitution and Supreme Court Rule 43, this Court has limited jurisdiction to issue extraordinary writs. The Court has no original jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus.3 NOW, THEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that the State=s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Paczkowksi=s petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: 3 Rocker v. State, Del. Supr., 240 A.2d 141, 142 (1968). -2- s/Joseph T. Walsh Justice -3-
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.
