Croll v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE PATRICK F. CROLL, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 372, 2011 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County Cr. ID Nos. 0801001836 0803007023 Submitted: August 2, 2011 Decided: August 11, 2011 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices ORDER This 11th day of August 2011, it appears to the Court that: (1) On July 26, 2011, the Court received the appellant s notice of appeal from the Superior Court s July 13, 2011 interlocutory order denying his motion for transcripts at State expense. On July 26, 2011, the Clerk issued a notice pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed based upon this Court s lack of jurisdiction to entertain an interlocutory appeal in a criminal matter. (2) On August 2, 2011, the appellant filed a response to the notice to show cause. In the response, the appellant states that this Court does have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal because it is from a final order of the Superior Court. (3) Under the Delaware Constitution, only a final order may be reviewed by this Court in a criminal case.1 The Superior Court s order denying the appellant s motion for transcripts at State expense is not a final order because it does not resolve all of the issues in the appellant s criminal case and, thus, is not intended to be the Superior Court s final act in that case.2 As such, the appellant s notice of appeal fails to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Myron T. Steele Chief Justice 1 Del. Const. art. IV, §11(1) (b). J.I. Kislak Mortgage Corp. v. William Matthews, Builder, Inc., 303 A.2d 648, 650 (Del. 1973). 2 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.
