State of Delaware v. Williams.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY STATE OF DELAWARE, v. MAURICE J. WILLIAMS, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ID No. 9901005150 ORDER Upon Defendant s Motion for Reargument - DENIED. 1. On January 11, 2012, the court denied Defendant s motion for sentence modification. On January 13, 2012, the court sentenced Defendant for Escape After Conviction. 2. On February 1, 2012, Defendant filed a motion for reargument of the January 11, 2012 denial. Defendant admits his motion is untimely, but asks for review in the interest of justice. Defendant alleges his motion is untimely because he could not obtain materials in time. 3. The motion is, indeed, untimely. Nothing Defendant presented was unobtainable before sentencing. The motion continues Defendant s pattern of waiting for the court to act, and then filing materials that should have been provided earlier. The court draws specific attention to the email chain leading to the denial, especially the court s December 27, 2011 admonishment about Defendant s serial submissions. (The court appreciates that the fault may not lie with counsel.) 4. Defendant s last submission on the sentence modification was the December 27, 2011 email. As stated above, the motion for sentence modification was denied on January 11, 2012. Defendant did not ask for time to provide another round of supporting materials. 5. The court is unmoved by Defendant s untimely submission. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant s untimely motion for reargument is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: February 9, 2012 /s/ Fred S. Silverman Judge oc: Prothonotary (Criminal) cc: Cynthia L. Faraone, Deputy Attorney General Michael W. Modica, Esquire 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.
