Matter of Durham
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE § § No. 111, 2002 § § § IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF NORRIS DURHAM FOR AN EXTRAORDINARY WRIT Submitted: March 22, 2002 Decided: May 6, 2002 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and HOLLAND, Justices ORDER This 6th day of May 2002, upon consideration of the petition of Norris Durham for an extraordinary writ and the State s answer and motion to dismiss, it appears to the Court that: (1) In May 1985, Durham pleaded guilty but mentally ill to Rape in the First Degree and Kidnaping in the Second Degree. He was sentenced to incarceration at Level V for life, plus 30 years. The Superior Court docket sheet reflects that, in 1992 and 1997, Durham moved for postconviction relief pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61. The Superior Court denied the motions, but Miller did not appeal the Superior Court s decisions to this Court. Although it is not clear on the face of Durham s petition for extraordinary relief, it appears he is requesting that his convictions be vacated. (2) A petition for an extraordinary writ may not be used as a substitute for a timely appeal.1 Durham failed to pursue fully the remedy available to him pursuant to Rule 61 by appealing the Superior Court s denials of his motions for postconviction relief. Moreover, Durham s petition states no basis for the issuance of an extraordinary writ. For these reasons, Durham s petition for extraordinary relief must be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Durham s petition for an extraordinary writ is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: s/Joseph T. Walsh Justice 1 Matushefske v. Herlihy, 214 A.2d 883, 885 (Del. 1965). -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.
