Jasinski v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE MICHAEL JASINSKI, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 353, 2018 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware Cr. ID No. 0001010220 (N) Submitted: October 8, 2018 Decided: December 4, 2018 Before VAUGHN, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices. ORDER After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion to affirm, and the record on appeal, the Court concludes that the judgment of the Superior Court should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior Court in its well-reasoned order dated June 11, 2018. The Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant’s motion for modification of his violation of probation sentence. To the extent the appellant claims he did not violate his probation, he cannot use this appeal to mount an untimely challenge to his violation of probation.1 1 See, e.g., Fisher v. State, 2003 WL 1443050, at *2 (Del. Mar. 19, 2003) (holding the appellant’s challenge to his violation of probation was untimely and he could not use his appeal from the 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/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice denial of a motion for reduction of sentence to collaterally attack the merits of his violation of probation). 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.
