State of Delaware v. Paul.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE RICHARD F. STOKES 1 THE CIRCLE, SUITE 2 SUSSEX C OUN TY C OUR THO USE GEOR GETO WN , DE 19947 JUDGE Wid-Donald Paul Inmate # 144 3400 Concord Road York County, PA 17402 Re: State of Delaware v. Wid-Donald Paul ID 0905014074 Upon Defendant s Second Motion for Postconviction Relief Summarily Dismissed. Submitted: Decided: August 9, 2011 September 29, 2011 Dear Mr. Paul: I have received your postconviction relief motion related to your guilty plea to Possession with the Intent to Deliver Cocaine. I denied your initial postconviction relief motion on March 31, 2011, after having ordered and received responses from the defense and the State. On July 13, 2011, the Supreme Court of Delaware dismissed your appeal as untimely. In the meantime, you filed with this Court a motion to resubmit a postconviction relief motion. I denied your motion on July 26, 2011. Your second postconviction relief motion was filed with this Court on August 8, Page 1 2011. You do not argue that your plea was involuntarily entered, which is the sole grounds for vacating a guilty plea after sentencing.1 Instead, you argue the merits of issues that were resolved against you in your initial postconviction relief motion. These issues are barred as having been formerly adjudicated, albeit phrased in terms of ineffective assistance. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(i)(4). Your motion is SUMMARILY DISMISSED for both reasons stated above. That is, you have not shown that your plea was involuntary, and the issues you raise have been previously adjudicated. IT IS SO ORDERED. Very truly yours, Richard F. Stokes cc: Prothonotary 1 Raison v. State, 469 A.2d 424, 425 (Del. 1983). Page 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.
