Case Title: Baker v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 164, 2011

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2011-08-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
WILLIAM BAKER, 
 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 164, 2011 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Sussex County 
§  Cr. ID Nos. 0701011608 and 
§                      0911019180 
§   
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: June 7, 2011 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
August  17, 2011 
 
Before BERGER, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 17th day of August 2011, upon consideration of the appellant’s opening 
brief, the State’s motion to affirm, and the record below, it appears to the Court 
that: 
 
(1) The defendant-appellant, William Baker, filed this appeal from the 
Superior Court’s sentence following a violation of probation (VOP) hearing.  The 
State of Delaware has filed a motion to affirm the judgment below on the ground 
that it is manifest on the face of Baker’s opening brief that his appeal is without 
merit.  We agree and affirm.   
 
(2) The record reflects that Baker pled guilty on August 9, 2007 to one 
count each of felony theft and second degree conspiracy.  The Superior Court 
 
2
immediately sentenced him to a total period of four years at Level V incarceration, 
with credit for one day served, to be suspended immediately for one year at Level 
III probation followed by two years at Level I probation (restitution only).  Baker 
violated the terms of his probation and was resentenced several times for these 
violations.  
 
(3) On March 2, 2010, Baker pled guilty to a charge of felony theft and was 
sentenced to two years at Level V incarceration, to be suspended for one year at 
Level IV (residential drug treatment), to be suspended upon the successful 
completion of treatment for one year at Level III (aftercare).  Additionally, as a 
result of his 2010 guilty plea, Baker also was found in violation of his 2007 
sentence.  For that VOP, his fourth, the Superior Court sentenced him to a total 
period of three years and eight months at Level V incarceration (with credit for 122 
days served), to be suspended entirely for one year at Level III (aftercare) followed 
by two years at Level I (restitution only).  
 
(4) On January 14, 2011, Baker violated his probation on both his 2007 and 
2011 convictions.  He was sentenced to a total period of five years and four months 
at Level V incarceration, with credit for 3 months served, to be suspended for two 
months at Level IV (VOP Center), to be followed by seven months at Level IV 
(work release), to be followed by one year at Level II probation and three years 
and four months at Level I probation (restitution only).  On March 17, 2011, Baker 
 
3
again was found in violation of his two previous sentences.  He was sentenced to a 
total period of four years and four months at Level V incarceration, to be 
suspended immediately for four months at Level IV (VOP Center), followed by 
three years and four months at Level I probation.  It is from this sentence that 
Baker appeals. 
 
(5) In his opening brief on appeal, Baker contends that he was not properly 
credited with time he served at Level V toward his Level IV (VOP Center) 
sentence.  Baker contends that he was sentenced to the VOP Center effective 
March 17, 2011 but that he was held at Level V and not transferred to the VOP 
Center until April 20, 2011.  Baker contends that the DOC erroneously calculated 
the starting date on his Level IV sentence as April 20 instead of March 17. 
 
(6) As the State points out, however, Baker was arrested on new charges of 
possession of marijuana and promoting prison contraband on March 4, 2011 while 
he was serving the two-month Level IV (VOP Center) portion of his January 2011 
sentence.  He was held at Level V on those new charges until he pled guilty to one 
count of promoting prison contraband and was sentenced on April 20, 2011.  The 
amount of time he was held at Level V on his latest arrest was credited toward his 
April 20, 2011 sentence.  Thus, he was not entitled to be credited a second time 
toward his March 17, 2011 sentence.* 
                                                 
* See Brisco-Bey v. State, 1993 WL 78216 (Mar. 13, 1993). 
 
4
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior 
Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
        Justice