Brown v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JAMES G. BROWN, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 457, 2003 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County Cr.A. No. IN88-06-0851 Cr. ID 88004213DI Submitted: November 21, 2003 Decided: December 18, 2003 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and BERGER, Justices. ORDER This 18th day of December 2003, upon consideration of the parties briefs and the record below, it appears to the Court that: (1) The defendant-appellant, James Brown, pled guilty in 1988 to one count of first degree unlawful sexual intercourse. The Superior Court sentenced Brown to life imprisonment. Brown unsuccessfully moved to withdraw his guilty plea on the ground that he had received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel. Since that time, Brown has filed several unsuccessful federal habeas corpus and state postconviction relief petitions asserting various arguments. In June 2003, Brown filed several motions including a motion for postconviction relief, as well as a motion to recuse the judge to whom the postconviction motion was assigned. The Superior Court denied all of Brown s motions. This appeal ensued. (2) Having carefully considered the parties respective positions, 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 August 18, 2003. The Superior Court was not required to consider the merits of Brown s claims, which were both time-barred and previously adjudicated.1 Moreover, we find no error in the Superior Court s denial of Brown s recusal motion. Without more, a judge s prior rulings in a case are not a sufficient basis for a recusal motion. 2 Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion in the Superior Court s summary disposition of Brown s motion for postconviction relief without holding a hearing.3 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Randy J. Holland Justice 1 Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(i)(1), (4) (2003). 2 See In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054 (Del. 1994). 3 See Maxion v. State, 686 A.2d 148, 151 (Del. 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.
