Case Title: Michelau v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 528, 2004

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2005-04-08T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JASON MICHELAU, 
  
 
§ 
No. 528, 2004 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Defendant Below,  
 
§  
Court Below: Superior Court
 
Appellant,  
 
 
§ 
of the State of Delaware, in  
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
and for Sussex County 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§  
 
§ 
Cr. ID No. 0104013797 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
  
§ 
 
§  
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
 
§ 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§                                                     
      
O R D E R 
 
This 8
th day of April 2005, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
On February 7, 2005, the Clerk issued a notice to show cause why 
this appeal should not be dismissed, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), for 
the appellant's failure to file his opening brief and appendix. 
(2) 
The February 7
th notice to show cause was sent to an address in 
Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where appellant indicated on his notice of appeal 
that he would be after December 7, 2004.  On February 22
nd, the notice to show 
cause was returned to the Clerk’s office with the notation, “Refused,” with a 
notation of a forwarding address in Woodinville, Washington.  The notice to 
show cause was then re-sent to that address by certified mail and returned on 
March 10, 2005, with the notation, “Moved, Left No Address” and a notation of 
another address in Woodinville, Washington.  The notice to show cause was 
 
2
again re-sent by certified mail on or about March 10, and was tracked on the 
United States Postal Service website as having been undeliverable as addressed 
on March 16, 2005, and that it would be returned to sender if appropriate 
information is available. 
(3) 
The appellant having failed to respond to the notice to show cause 
within the required ten-day period, and having failed to report his current 
address to the Court, dismissal of this action is deemed to be unopposed.∗ 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme 
Court Rules 3(b) and 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED. 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs 
Justice 
                         
∗ Supr. Ct. R. 3(b)(2); Supr. Ct. R. 30(c).