Hartman v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE WILLIAM HARTMAN, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 435, 2017 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware Cr. ID No. 0508007488 (S) Submitted: November 14, 2017 Decided: December 19, 2017 Before VALIHURA,VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices. ORDER This 19th day of December 2017, after consideration of the appellant's opening brief, the State's motion to affirm, and the record on appeal, the Court concludes that the judgment below should be affirmed. The Superior Court did not err in dismissing the appellant's second motion for postconviction relief. The motion was procedurally barred and failed to satisfy the pleading requirements of Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(d)(2). NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. 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.