Buchanan v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DAVID BUCHANAN, Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 545, 2014 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for Sussex County Cr. ID 0801031784 Submitted: October 8, 2014 Decided: November 21, 2014 Before STRINE, Chief Justice, RIDGELY, and VALIHURA, Justices. ORDER This 21st day of November 2014, after careful consideration of appellant David Buchanan’s opening brief and the State’s motion to affirm, we find it manifest that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court=s wellreasoned decision dated September 16, 2014. The Superior Court did not err in summarily dismissing Buchanan’s fourth motion for postconviction relief because the motion failed to plead with particularity a claim that (i) new evidence exists that creates a strong inference that Buchanan is actually innocent; or (ii) a new rule of constitutional law made retroactive to cases on collateral review renders his convictions invalid. 1 1 Del. Super. Ct. R. 61(d)(2) (effective June 4, 2014). As the Superior Court noted, Buchanan’s petition restates the same arguments that he has raised in prior petitions. We have invested considerable time detailing the reasons why these claims are barred. We will not continue to invest scarce judicial resources to address his untimely, repetitive, previously adjudicated claims. We encourage Buchanan to be mindful of Rule 61(j) before filing any further frivolous petitions in the Superior Court. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Karen L. Valihura 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.
