Case Title: Foster v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 661, 2009

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2009-12-04T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JOHN E. FOSTER, 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
No. 661, 2009 
 
Defendant Below,  
 
§ 
 
Appellant,  
 
 
§ 
Court Below—Superior Court  
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
of the State of Delaware in and 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
for New Castle County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
 
§ 
Cr. ID No. 0703031898 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: November 24, 2009 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
December 4, 2009 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 4th day of December 2009, upon consideration of the appellant’s 
response to the notice to show cause, the appellee’s answer to the appellant’s 
response to the notice to show cause, and the appellant’s motion for appointment 
of counsel, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
On November 10, 2009, the appellant, John E. Foster, filed a notice of 
appeal from a Superior Court commissioner’s October 1, 2009 report 
recommending that Foster’s motion for postconviction relief should be denied.  
Upon receipt of the notice of appeal, the Clerk issued a notice directing that Foster 
show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed pursuant to Supreme Court 
 
2
Rule 29(b) for this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider an appeal directly from a 
commissioner’s report and recommendation.1   
 
(2) 
In his response (and numerous supplemental responses) to the notice 
to show cause, Foster maintains that the Court should entertain his appeal.  Foster 
does not, however, address the jurisdictional issue raised in the notice to show 
cause.  
 
(3) 
The Court’s appellate jurisdiction is limited to decisions issued by 
judges of a court.2  The Court does not have the authority to hear an appeal directly 
from a report and recommendation of a Superior Court commissioner without 
intermediate review by a Superior Court judge.3 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 
29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.  The motion for appointment of counsel is 
MOOT. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Henry duPont Ridgely 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice  
                                          
 
1 Johnson v. State, 884 A.2d 475, 479 (Del. 2005). 
2 Id.  
3 Id.  See also Cleveland v. State, 2009 WL 1579000 (Del. Supr.) (dismissing appeal from 
commissioner’s order as an “impermissible interlocutory appeal in a criminal case”); Wilmer v. 
State, 2009 WL 696400 (Del. Supr.) (dismissing appeal from commissioner’s report 
recommending that appellant’s motion for postconviction relief should be denied).  In this case, 
it appears that Foster filed objections to the commissioner’s report and recommendation, and that 
those objections are pending before a Superior Court judge.