Case Title: Pickle v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 381, 2021

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2022-02-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
ROBERT J. PICKLE, 
 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 381, 2021 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below–Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§   
§  Cr. ID No.  1309017881(K) 
§                                          
§  
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: December 9, 2021 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: February 17, 2022 
 
Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion 
to affirm, and the Superior Court record, we conclude that the Superior Court’s 
dismissal of the appellant’s second motion for postconviction relief should be 
affirmed.  The appellant, Robert Pickle, could not invoke Superior Court Criminal 
Rule 61(d)(2) because he opted to plead guilty instead of proceeding to a jury trial.1  
And Pickle does not claim that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction to enter a 
judgment of conviction and sentence him.2   
 
1 Del. Super. Crim. R. 61(d)(2) (providing that a second or subsequent motion for postconviction 
relief must be summarily dismissed unless the movant was convicted after a trial and satisfies 
additional pleading requirements). 
2 Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(i)(5). 
2 
 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to affirm is 
GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Karen L. Valihura__________________ 
Justice