Case Title: Price v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 314, 2018

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2018-12-13T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
ALLEN J. PRICE, a.k.a. ALLEN  
§ 
PRINCE,1  
 
 
 
§ 
No. 314, 2018 
 
§ 
 
 
Defendant Below,  
 
§ 
Court Below:  Superior Court  
Appellant,  
 
 
§ 
of the State of Delaware 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Cr. ID Nos. 1704004056 (N)  
§ 
 
 
1704004125B (N)   
 STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
 
§ 
 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
Submitted:  September 26, 2018     
 
  Decided:  December 13, 2018 
 
Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices.  
 
O R D E R 
 
Upon consideration of the no-merit brief and motion to withdraw filed by the 
appellant’s counsel under Supreme Court Rule 26(c), the State’s response, and the 
Superior Court record, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
Following his indictment in July 2017 on drug and weapon offenses, 
the appellant, Allen J. Price, a.k.a. Allen Prince,2 entered into a guilty plea on May 
22, 2018, to two counts in the indictment:  Tier 4 Drug Dealing, a class B felony, 
and Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited (“PFBPP”), a class C felony.  In 
                                
1 The notice of appeal identifies the defendant-below/appellant as “Allen J. Price, a.k.a. Allen 
Prince.”  Documents in the Superior Court record refer to the defendant also as “Allan J. Price.” 
2 Supra. 
2 
 
exchange for Price’s guilty plea, the State entered a nolle prosequi on the other 
counts in the indictment and made a recommendation of sentence.  The Superior 
Court sentenced Price to a total of forty years of Level V incarceration (twenty-five 
years for Drug Dealing and fifteen years for PFBPP), suspended after a total of 
twelve years minimum-mandatory (two years for Drug Dealing and ten years for 
PFBPP), followed by decreasing levels of supervision. 
(2) 
On appeal, Price’s trial counsel has filed a brief and a motion to 
withdraw under Supreme Court Rule 26(c).  Counsel asserts that, based upon his 
complete and careful examination of the Superior Court record, there are no arguably 
appealable issues.  In his attorney statement filed as part of his Rule 26(c) 
submission, Counsel indicates that he provided Price with copy of the motion to 
withdraw, the draft Rule 26(c) brief and appendix, and a letter explaining that Price 
had a right to submit written points for the Court’s consideration.  Price has not 
submitted any points for the Court’s consideration.  The State has responded to the 
Rule 26(c) brief and has moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment. 
(3) 
When reviewing a motion to withdraw and an accompanying brief 
under Rule 26(c), we must be satisfied that the appellant’s counsel has made a 
conscientious examination of the record and the law for arguable claims.3   Also, we 
                                
3 Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83 (1988); McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 486 U.S. 429, 
442 (1988); Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). 
3 
 
must conduct our own review of the record and determine “whether the appeal is 
indeed so frivolous that it may be decided without an adversary presentation.”4 
(4) 
In this case, we reviewed the record carefully and concluded that 
Price’s appeal is wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable issue.  
We are satisfied that Price’s counsel made a conscientious effort to examine the 
record and the law and properly determined that Price could not raise a meritorious 
claim on appeal. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior 
Court is AFFIRMED.  The motion to withdraw is moot. 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice  
                                
4 Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. at 81.