Case Title: Black v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 70, 2005

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2005-07-20T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
  DEAN C. BLACK,                    
           
Petitioner Below- 
Appellant,   
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
     
 
 
     
Respondent Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§
 
 
   No. 70, 2005 
 
   Court Below---Superior Court 
   of the State of Delaware, 
   in and for New Castle County  
   C.A. No. 05M-02-024 
                      
 
Submitted:  May 20, 2005  
   Decided:  July 20, 2005    
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 20th day of July 2005, upon consideration of the briefs on appeal and 
the record below, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The petitioner-appellant, Dean C. Black, filed an appeal from the 
Superior Court’s February 8, 2005 order dismissing his petition for a writ of 
habeas corpus.  We find no merit to the appeal.  Accordingly, we AFFIRM. 
 
(2) 
In March 1985, Black was found guilty by a Superior Court jury of 
two counts of Attempted Rape in the First Degree.  He was sentenced to 25 years 
incarceration at Level V, to be suspended after 15 years for probation.  Black’s 
 
 
-2-
conviction was affirmed by this Court on direct appeal.1  Black subsequently filed 
a motion for state postconviction relief and a petition for federal habeas corpus 
relief, both of which were unsuccessful.  Following Black’s release, he was found 
to have committed a violation of probation and was re-incarcerated.  Since then, 
Black has filed numerous petitions and motions challenging his conviction and 
sentence, all of which have been unsuccessful.   
 
(3) 
In this appeal, Black claims that the Superior Court should have 
granted his petition for a writ of habeas corpus because he is serving an illegal 
sentence.  Specifically, he argues that the Department of Correction has 
miscalculated his good time credits. 
 
(4) 
In Delaware, the writ of habeas corpus provides relief on a very 
limited basis.2  Habeas corpus only provides “an opportunity for one illegally 
confined or incarcerated to obtain judicial review of the jurisdiction of the court 
ordering the commitment.”3  “Habeas corpus relief is not available to ‘[p]ersons 
committed or detained on a charge of treason or felony, the species whereof is 
plainly and fully set forth in the commitment.’”4 
                                                 
1 Black v. State, Del. Supr., No. 173, 1985, Walsh, J. (June 23, 1986). 
2 Hall v. Carr, 692 A.2d 888, 891 (Del. 1997). 
3 Id. 
4 Id. (quoting Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 6902(1)). 
 
 
-3-
 
(5) 
Black has failed to show that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction to 
convict or sentence him and he is, therefore, not entitled to habeas corpus relief.  
Moreover, Black has presented his argument concerning the calculation of his 
good time credits before and that argument has consistently been rejected.  He is, 
therefore, barred from re-litigating that issue pursuant to the “law of the case” 
doctrine.5 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior 
Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice 
 
 
                                                 
5 Brittingham v. State, 705 A.2d 577, 579 (Del. 1998).