Drummond v. State

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DALLAS H. DRUMMOND, JR., Defendant BelowAppellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 99, 2016 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware, Cr. ID Nos. 1004010489 and 1001008949A Submitted: March 29, 2016 Decided: April 4, 2016 Before HOLLAND, VALIHURA, and SEITZ, Justices. ORDER This 4th day of April 2016, it appears to the Court that: (1) On March 1, 2016, the Court received the appellant’s notice of appeal from a Superior Court sentencing order dated February 4, 2013. The appellant’s notice of appeal is untimely by nearly three years. (2) The Clerk issued a notice under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), directing the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed.1 The appellant filed an untimely response to the notice to show cause on March 29, 2016, arguing the merits of his appeal. 1 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(ii). (3) Time is a jurisdictional requirement.2 A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk of this Court within 30 days of sentencing in a direct criminal appeal in order for the notice 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, an untimely appeal cannot be considered.5 (4) This case does not fall within the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal. Thus, the appeal must be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice 2 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989). 3 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(iii), 10(a) (2016). 4 Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481, 486-87 (Del. 2012). 5 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). -2-