Taylor v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE MARK TAYLOR, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 563, 2017 Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware ID. No. 1512004805 (S) Submitted: April 27, 2018 Decided: July 9, 2018 Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices. ORDER The Court has considered the parties’ briefs in this appeal from the Superior Court’s opinion denying Mark Taylor’s motion for postconviction relief under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61.1 We affirm the Superior Court’s judgment. When deciding that Taylor’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim was without substantive merit, it was within the Superior Court’s discretion to credit defense counsel’s averments that he “strongly advised” Taylor against taking a plea until counsel had an opportunity to review discovery.2 “A criminal defendant has ‘ultimate authority to make certain fundamental decisions regarding the case [such 1 2 State v. Mark Taylor, 2017 WL 6029302 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 30, 2017). Id. at *3. as] whether to plead guilty, waive a jury, testify in his or her own behalf, or take an appeal.’”3 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. Justice 3 Emmett Taylor v. State, 28 A.3d 399, 406 (Del. 2011) (quoting Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751 (1983)). 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.