Steele v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE FREDERICK STEELE, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 314, 2014 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County Cr. ID 1201006944 Submitted: July 9, 2014 Decided: July 21, 2014 Before STRINE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and BERGER, Justices. ORDER This 21st day of July 2014, it appears to the Court that: (1) On June 13, 2014, the Court received appellant Frederick Steele s notice of appeal from a Superior Court sentencing order dated February 1, 2013. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Steele to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for his failure to file his notice of appeal within thirty days of sentencing.1 1 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(ii). (2) Steele filed a response to the notice to show cause on July 9, 2014. The response addresses the underlying merits of his appeal but does not address his failure to file his appeal in a timely manner. (3) Time is a jurisdictional requirement.2 A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk of this Court within the applicable time period in order to be effective.3 An appellant s pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6.4 Unless an appellant can demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, the appeal cannot be considered.5 (4) In this case, Steele does not assert that his untimely filing is attributable to court-related personnel. Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal. Thus, the Court concludes that the within appeal must be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Randy J. Holland Justice 2 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989). 3 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a). 4 Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481, 486-87 (Del. 2012). 5 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). -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.
