Hardin v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE RUDOLPH V. HARDIN, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 444, 2005 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County Cr.A. Nos. IN02-09-1706 thru 1709 Submitted: January 18, 2006 Decided: March 8, 2006 Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. ORDER This 8th day of March 2006, the Court has considered the appellee s motion to affirm pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 25(a) and finds it manifest on the face of the appellant s opening brief that the appeal is without merit for the reasons stated by the Superior Court in its well-reasoned decision dated September 12, 2005. We find no error or abuse of discretion on the part of the Superior Court in any respect. To the extent Hardin has failed to brief issues previously raised in the Superior Court, he has waived his right to pursue those issues in this appeal.1 To the extent Hardin raises issues in 1 Somerville v. State, 703 A.2d 629, 631 (Del. 1997). this appeal that were not previously raised in the Superior Court, we decline to consider those issues.2 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the appellee s motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jack B. Jacobs Justice 2 Supr. Ct. R. 8. 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.