Case Title: Matter of Phillips

Citation: 

Docket Number: 541, 2002

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2002-10-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
  
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
PETITION OF GREGORY S. 
PHILLIPS FOR A WRIT OF 
CERTIORARI 
 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 541, 2002 
§ 
§ 
 
Submitted: October 2, 2002 
  Decided:   October 28, 2002 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER and STEELE, Justices 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 28th day of October 2002, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
Petitioner Gregory S. Phillips is an inmate in the custody of the 
Delaware Department of Corrections.  Phillips seeks to invoke the original 
jurisdiction of this Court by requesting the issuance of a writ of certiorari.1  In 
his petition, Phillips, purportedly on behalf of “all smoking prisoners,” seeks an 
injunction to prevent the Department of Corrections from enforcing its ban on 
all tobacco products in the Delaware prison system.  Phillips contends that the 
policy is discriminatory and a violation of free speech.  The State of Delaware, as 
the real party in interest, has filed a response to Phillips’ petition requesting that 
the petition be dismissed. 
                                                 
1SUPR. CT. R. 43. 
 
 
-2- 
(2) 
A writ of certiorari is an extraordinary remedy used to correct 
irregularities in the proceedings of a trial court.2  Certiorari is available to 
challenge a final order of a trial court only where the right of appeal is denied, a 
grave question of public policy and interest is involved, and no other basis for 
review is available.3  Unless these threshold requirements are met, this Court has 
no jurisdiction to hear the claims.4 
(2) 
Phillips has failed to demonstrate that he is challenging a final order 
of a trial court where the right of appeal was denied and no other basis for review 
is available.  Moreover, he has failed to demonstrate that the ability to smoke 
while incarcerated presents a grave question of public policy and interest that 
would support the issuance of a writ of certiorari.  Because Phillips fails to meet 
the threshold requirements for the issuance of a writ of certiorari, this Court has 
                                                 
2Shoemaker v. State, 375 A.2d 431, 437 (Del. 1977). 
3Id. 
4In re Butler, 609 A.2d 1080, 1081 (Del. 1992). 
 
 
-3- 
no jurisdiction to hear his claims.  Accordingly, Phillips’ petition must be 
dismissed. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to 
dismiss is GRANTED.  The petition for a writ of certiorari is DISMISSED. 
BY THE COURT: 
/s/Carolyn Berger 
Justice