Jenkins v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE WILMER JENKINS, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § No. 267, 2019 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware Cr. ID No. 0701012400 (S) Submitted: August 26, 2019 Decided: October 4, 2019 Before VAUGHN, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices. ORDER After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the appellee’s motion to affirm, and the record on appeal, we conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons stated in the Superior Court’s order, dated May 29, 2019, denying the appellant’s motion for correction of illegal sentence. A judge’s departure from the SENTAC guidelines does not make a sentence illegal under Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(a).1 The appellant’s reliance on North Carolina v. Pearce is misplaced because his sentence after his retrial was 1 Allgauer v. State, 2014 WL 1017507, *1 (Del. Mar. 13, 2014) (citing Mayes v. State, 604 A.2d 839, 845 (Del. 1992)). not more severe than his sentence after his first trial.2 The Court declines to address the appellant’s request for reduction of his sentence because he did not raise that request or the grounds for that request in the Superior Court.3 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that motion to affirm is GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice 2 395 U.S. 711, 725-26 (1969) (holding that trial judge who imposes more severe sentence upon a defendant after a retrial must affirmatively state on the record the reasons for doing so to ensure the absence of a vindictive motivation for imposing a more severe sentence). After his first trial, the Superior Court sentenced the appellant to twenty-five years of Level V incarceration suspended after twenty years. After his retrial, the Superior Court sentenced the appellant to twenty-five years of Level V incarceration suspended after sixteen years. 3 Supr. Ct. R. 8. 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.