Davis v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE PERNELL L. DAVIS, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 474, 2000 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County Cr.A. No. IN95-11-0431 Submitted: March 28, 2001 Decided: April 25, 2001 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and BERGER, Justices. ORDER This 25th day of April 2001, upon consideration of the parties briefs, it appears to the Court that: (1) The defendant-appellant, Pernell L. Davis, was convicted in 1998 of first degree robbery. The Superior Court sentenced Davis to ten years in jail followed by five years probation. On direct appeal, Davis counsel filed a brief pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 26(c). Although advised that he could do so, Davis did not file any additional points for this Court to consider on direct appeal. The Court affirmed Davis conviction and sentence. In May 2000, Davis filed his first petition for postconviction relief and asserted four grounds for relief: (i) the trial court erred when it failed to instruct the jury on accomplice liability; (ii) the trial court erred by giving a misleading jury instruction; (iii) the State improperly vouched for the credibility of a key State witness; and (iv) Davis trial and appellate counsel were ineffective. The Superior Court denied Davis petition on its merits. This is Davis appeal from the Superior Court s denial of his petition. (2) Having carefully considered the parties respective briefs, we find it manifest that the judgment of the Superior Court should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court s well-reasoned decision dated September 6, 2000. The Superior Court did not err in concluding that Davis claims lacked merit. Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion in the Superior Court s summary disposition of Davis claims without holding a hearing.1 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Randy J. Holland Justice 1 See Maxion v. State, Del. Supr., 686 A.2d 148, 11 (1996). 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.