Layton v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SAMUEL LAYTON, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 585, 2012 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for Sussex County Cr. ID 0205011859 Submitted: November 20, 2012 Decided: December 18, 2012 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and RIDGELY, Justices ORDER This 18th day of December 2012, we have carefully considered the appellant s opening brief, the State s motion to affirm, and the record on appeal. We find it manifest that the judgment below should be affirmed for the reasons set forth in the Superior Court s decision dated September 25, 2012. The Superior Court did not err in concluding that the claims raised in the appellant s third motion for postconviction relief were procedurally barred by the provisions of Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(i)(1), (i)(2), (i)(3), and/or (i)(4) and that appellant had failed to overcome these procedural hurdles. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Myron T. Steele Chief Justice 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.
