Trawick v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE CHARLES TRAWICK, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § No. 350, 2019 § § Court Below—Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID No. 0201012191 (N) § § § Submitted: August 28, 2019 Decided: October 16, 2019 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, we conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior Court’s orders dated July 1, 2019 and July 23, 2019, which summarily dismissed the appellant’s fourth motion for postconviction relief and denied his motion for reconsideration, respectively. The appellant has not overcome the procedural bars that are set forth in Rule 61 by pleading with particularity any new evidence of actual innocence or any new, retroactive rule of constitutional law that applies to his case and renders his conviction invalid.1 Contrary to the appellant’s assertion in the motion for reconsideration that he filed in the Superior Court, Rule 61 as adopted effective April 6, 2017 applies to his motion, which was filed in June 2019.2 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/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice 1 2 SUPER. CT. CRIM. R. 61(d)(2). See also SUPER. CT. CRIM. R. 61(i)(1)-(4). See Durham v. State, 2017 WL 5450746 (Del. Nov. 13, 2017). 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.
