Case Title: Colon v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 146, 2004

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2004-04-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
WILLIAM COLON, 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
v. 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
Plaintiff Below, 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 146, 2004 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below:  Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Kent County 
§  Cr. ID No. 0101017505 
§ 
§ 
 
Submitted:  April 20, 2004 
Decided:  April 28, 2004 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER, and STEELE, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 28th day of April 2004, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
The appellant, William Colon, filed a notice of appeal on April 13, 
2004 from an order of the Superior Court dated March 9, 2004.  The Superior 
Court’s order denied Colon’s motion of modification of sentence.  On April 14, 
2004, the Clerk of this Court issued a notice to Colon to show cause why the 
appeal should not be dismissed for his failure to file his notice within the thirty-
day appeal period.1   
                                                           
1 See Del. Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(i); 10 Del. C. § 148 (1999). 
 
 
 
 
2
(2) 
Colon filed a response to the notice to show cause.  In his 
response, Colon claims he mailed his notice of appeal on April 8, which was 
the last day of the thirty-day appeal period.  He attributes the untimeliness of 
his filing to the prison mail system and to a holiday weekend.   
(3) 
We find Colon’s contentions unavailing.  This Court lacks 
jurisdiction to consider an appeal when the notice of appeal is not received by 
the Clerk of this Court in a timely manner unless the appellant can demonstrate 
that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related 
personnel.2  Colon does not contend that the failure to timely file his appeal is 
attributable in some way to court-related personnel.  Accordingly, this Court 
has no jurisdiction to hear this untimely appeal.3 
 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court 
Rules 6 and 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Carolyn Berger 
Justice 
                                                           
2 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989) (timely notice required to be filed 
regardless of mailing date) 
3 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).