Case Title: Dickens v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 498, 2003

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2004-06-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
KEVIN L.  DICKENS,  
 
' 
' 
No.  498, 2003 
Defendant Below,  
 
' 
Appellant,  
 
 
' 
Court BelowBSuperior Court 
' 
of the State of Delaware, in and 
v. 
 
 
 
 
' 
for New Castle County in 
' 
N02-04-2366A. 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
' 
' 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
 
' 
Def.  ID No.  0122001247 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
' 
 
Submitted: May 13, 2004 
Decided: 
June 25, 2004 
 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and JACOBS, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 25th day of June 2004, upon consideration of the briefs of the 
parties, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
In February 2002, a Court of Common Pleas jury convicted Kevin 
L. Dickens of one count of Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree and one 
count of Failure to Submit to Fingerprinting and Photographs.  Dickens was 
sentenced to thirty days at Level V for Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree 
and to 120 days at Level V, suspended after thirty days, for Failure to Submit to 
Fingerprinting and Photographs. 
 
 
2 
(2) 
Dickens appealed his conviction for Failure to Submit to 
Fingerprinting and Photographs to the Superior Court.  By decision dated July 
11, 2003, the Superior Court affirmed.1  Dickens did not immediately appeal 
the Superior Court=s decision to this Court.  Instead, on August 7, 2003, he filed 
a motion for reargument in the Superior Court.  By order dated September 16, 
2003, the Superior Court denied the motion for reargument on the basis that the 
motion was untimely under the Superior Court Rules.2 
(3) 
Dickens has appealed the Superior Court=s order of September 16, 
2003, that denied his motion for reargument.  In his opening brief, Dickens also 
alleges errors that were made at his trial in the Court of Common Pleas.  
(4) 
A motion for reargument must be filed within five days after the 
filing of the Superior Court=s decision.3  The time allotted for filing a motion 
for reargument may not be extended.4  Moreover, only a timely filed motion for 
                                                 
1Dickens v.  State, 2003 WL 21982924 (Del.  Super.  Ct.). 
2Dickens v.  State, 2003 WL 22172737 (Del.  Super.  Ct.). 
3Super.  Ct.  Civ. R.  59(e); see also Super.  Ct.  Crim.  R.  57(d) (providing for the 
application of the Superior Court Civil Rules).  
4Super.  Ct.  Civ. R.  6(b). 
 
 
3 
reargument will suspend the finality of the judgment and toll the time in which 
to file a notice of appeal with this Court.5 
(5) 
In this case, the Superior Court=s July 11 order was docketed on 
July 16, 2003.  Consequently, Dickens= motion for reargument was due to be 
filed on or before July 23, 2003.6  Dickens did not file his motion until August 
7, 2003, fifteen days after the expiration of the July 23 deadline.   
(6) 
Dickens= motion for reargument was untimely and did not serve to 
toll the thirty-day period in which to appeal from the Superior Court=s July 11 
decision.  As a result, Dickens= appeal from the July 11 decision had to be filed 
no later than August 15, 2003.  Dickens= notice of appeal was not filed until 
October 2, 2003.  Thus, his appeal is limited to addressing the September 16, 
2003, denial of his motion for reargument and does not extend to addressing the 
merit of his appeal.7 
                                                 
5Linda D.P. v.  Robert J.P., 493 A.2d 968 (Del. 1985); Duffy v.  State, 1998 WL 
138945 (Del.  Supr.). 
6See Super.  Ct.  Crim.  R.  45(a) (excluding Saturday and Sunday from computation). 
7Saunders v.  State, 1998 WL 112556 (Del.  Supr.). 
 
 
4 
(7) 
Dickens concedes that his motion for reargument was untimely, 
and he acknowledges that he was unaware of the five-day time period for filing 
a motion for reargument.  Nonetheless, Dickens urges the Court to accept his 
appeal as if it were timely filed from the Superior Court=s July 11 decision on 
the basis that prison officials Adenied [him] access to the courts and legal 
documents@ from July 23, 2003 until August 15, 2003, when he was Aput in 
infirmary and isolation.@ 
(8) 
Dickens= claim that prison officials prevented him from filing a 
timely notice of appeal on or before August 15, 2003, is not persuasive.  His 
contention is belied by the fact that he filed his motion for reargument in the 
Superior Court on August 7, 2003, during the period of time in which he claims 
that he was denied access to the courts.8 
(9) 
We have concluded that the judgment should be affirmed on the 
basis of the Superior Court=s order of September 16, 2003.  Dickens= motion for 
reargument was not filed within the five-day reargument period.  Because the 
                                                 
8The record reflects that the motion is dated August 5, 2003, and bears a postmark of 
August 6, 2003.  
 
 
5 
motion for reargument was untimely, the Superior Court had no jurisdiction to 
consider it.9   
                                                 
9Preform Building Components, Inc.  v.  Edwards, 280 A.2d 697, 698 (Del.  1971). 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
BY THE COURT:  
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
Chief Justice