Middlebrook v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE NIKERRAY K. MIDDLEBROOK, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 30, 2005 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County Cr. ID No. 9608015635 Submitted: July 29, 2005 Decided: September 21, 2005 Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. ORDER This 21st day of September 2005, upon consideration of the briefs of the parties and the record below, it appears to the Court that the judgment of the Superior Court should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons set forth in its well-reasoned decision dated December 16, 2004. We find no error or abuse of discretion on the part of the Superior Court in denying the appellant s motion for postconviction relief. To the extent that the appellant seeks to assert claims in this appeal that were not asserted in the Superior Court, we decline to review those claims.1 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jack B. Jacobs Justice Supr. Ct. R. 8. The appellant claims for the first time in this appeal that his counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to the prosecutor s comments at sentencing and by failing to request DNA or ballistics testing of evidence. 1 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.
