Case Title: Matter of Allen

Citation: 

Docket Number: 269, 2010

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2010-06-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
PETITION OF JAMES E. ALLEN 
FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS  
§ 
§  No. 269, 2010 
§ 
 
Submitted:  May 28, 2010 
Decided: June 28, 2010 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 28th day of June 2010, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The petitioner, James E. Allen, seeks to invoke this Court’s 
original jurisdiction to issue an extraordinary writ of mandamus1 to compel 
the Superior Court to re-calculate his Level V time served, apply it to his 
current Level V sentence, and grant his motion for sentence modification.  
We find that Allen’s petition manifestly fails to invoke the original 
jurisdiction of this Court.  Accordingly, the petition must be dismissed. 
 
(2) 
In August 2009, Allen pleaded guilty to Burglary in the Second 
Degree, Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree, and Conspiracy in the 
Second Degree.  On the burglary conviction, Allen was sentenced to 8 years 
of Level V incarceration, to be suspended after 5 years for probation.  On the 
attempted burglary conviction, he was sentenced to 8 years at Level V, to be 
suspended after 5 years for 2 years of probation.  On the conspiracy 
                                                 
1 Del. Const. art. IV, §11(6); Supr. Ct. R. 43. 
 
2 
conviction, he was sentenced to 2 years at Level V, to be suspended for 
probation.  Allen did not file a direct appeal from his convictions.   
 
(3) 
In November 2009 and again in April 2010, Allen filed motions 
for sentence modification in the Superior Court.  The Superior Court denied 
both motions on the ground that Allen has been credited with all the Level V 
time to which he is entitled.  Allen did not file appeals from those denials.  
Allen has now filed the instant petition for a writ of mandamus requesting 
this Court to compel the Superior Court to issue a new sentencing order 
crediting him with an additional 2,482 days of Level V time.   
 
(4) 
A writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy issued by this 
Court to compel a trial court to perform a duty.2  As a condition precedent to 
the issuance of the writ, the petitioner must demonstrate that a) he has a clear 
right to the performance of the duty; b) no other adequate remedy is 
available; and c) the trial court has arbitrarily failed or refused to perform its 
duty.3    
 
(5) 
Allen has not demonstrated that he is entitled to mandamus 
relief.  He has not shown that he has a clear right to the performance of a 
duty that the Superior Court has arbitrarily failed or refused to perform.  
Moreover, he has failed to show that appeals from the Superior Court’s 
                                                 
2 In re Bordley, 545 A.2d 619, 620 (Del. 1988). 
3 Id. 
 
3 
denials of his previous motions would not have provided him with an 
adequate remedy.  As such, his petition must be dismissed. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Allen’s petition for a 
writ of mandamus is DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice