Miller v. Akinbayo
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ROBERT W. MILLER, Petitioner Below, Appellant, v. KOLAWOLE O. AKINBAYO, WARDEN, H.R.Y.C.I, Respondent Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 546, 2017 Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware C.A. No. N17M-11-154 Submitted: March 16, 2018 Decided: May 21, 2018 Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices ORDER (1) The appellant, Robert W. Miller, filed this appeal from the Superior Court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The appellee, State of Delaware, has moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment on the ground that it is manifest on the face of Miller’s opening brief that the appeal is without merit. (2) In 2015, Miller pleaded guilty to a felony offense and was sentenced to eight years of Level V incarceration followed by six months of Level IV supervision.1 We affirmed Miller’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal.2 1 2 State v. Miller, Del. Super., Cr. ID No. 1412002671 (N). Miller v. State, 2016 WL 3410306 (Del. May 18, 2016). Thereafter, we dismissed Miller’s appeal from the denial of his first motion for postconviction relief.3 Miller did not appeal the denial of his second postconviction motion. (3) On November 22, 2017, Miller filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and a supporting memorandum. By order dated November 27, 2017 the Superior Court denied the petition after determining that Miller’s commitment was regular on its face, and that he was not being illegally detained. This appeal followed. (4) When a prisoner’s commitment is regular on its face, there can be no relief through habeas corpus.4 Miller pleaded guilty to a felony offense; his commitment to serve a sentence for the conviction is valid on its face. Because Miller is being held under a valid commitment, the Superior Court correctly determined that his petition and supporting memorandum did not support the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice 3 4 Miller v. State, 2017 WL 568362 (Del. Feb. 9, 2017). Hall v. Carr, 692 A.2d 888, 891 (Del. 1997) (quoting 10 Del. C. § 6902(1)). 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.
