Celatka v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE PHILIP J. CELATKA, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 311, 2002 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for Kent County Cr.A. Nos. IK00-08-0376 and -0383 Cr. ID 0008008225 Submitted: August 12, 2002 Decided: August 29, 2002 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH, and HOLLAND, Justices. ORDER This 29th day of August 2002, upon consideration of the appellant s opening brief, the State s motion to affirm, and the record below, it appears to the Court that: (1) In December 2000, the defendant-appellant, Philip Celatka, pleaded guilty, pursuant to then-existing Superior Court Criminal Rule 11(e)(1)(C), to one count of first degree unlawful sexual intercourse and one count of continuous sexual abuse of a child. The victim was Celatka s minor daughter. The Superior Court sentenced him to thirty years at Level V incarceration, suspended after serving seventeen years for eight years at decreasing levels of supervision. In April 2001, Celatka filed a petition for postconviction relief, which the Superior Court denied. This appeal ensued. (2) Having carefully considered the parties= respective contentions and the record below, we find it manifest that the judgment of the Superior Court must be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court=s well-reasoned decision dated May 8, 2002, which adopted the Superior Court Commissioner s Report and Recommendation. Celatka s claims were not raised prior to the entry of his guilty plea and thus were procedurally barred by Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(i)(3). Moreover, Celatka s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were conclusory and unsupported by the record and, thus, legally insufficient to establish that his counsel s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and was prejudicial.* NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State s motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: s/Joseph T. Walsh Justice * See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 (1984). 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.