Case Title: Coates v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 160, 2011

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2011-11-08T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
BRANDON COATES, 
 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 160, 2011 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID 0609014541 
§   
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: September 9, 2011 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: November 8, 2011 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and BERGER, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 8th day of November 2011, upon consideration of the parties’ 
briefs and the record below, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The defendant-appellant, Brandon Coates, filed this appeal from 
the Superior Court’s order sentencing him for his second violation of 
probation (VOP).  Coates contends that the evidence presented at the VOP 
hearing was insufficient to sustain the Superior Court’s findings.  We find no 
support for Coates’ contentions.  Accordingly, we affirm the Superior Court’s 
judgment. 
  
(2) 
The record reflects that Coates pled guilty in May 2008 to one 
count of second degree assault.  The Superior Court sentenced him to four 
 
2
years and six months at Level V incarceration to be suspended after serving 
two years for a period of probation.  In July 2010, the Superior Court found 
that Coates had violated the terms of his probation and sentenced him to two 
years at Level V incarceration, to be suspended immediately for probation.  In 
February 2011, Coates’ probation officer filed a violation report alleging that 
Coates had violated probation because: (i) he was arrested on a new criminal 
charge in September 2010; (ii) he failed to report to his probation officer 
twice in January 2011; (iii) he conducted a drug transaction on January 13, 
2011; (iv) he possessed drug paraphernalia in his home on February 2, 2011; 
(v) he missed two curfew checks; and (vi) he left the State without his 
probation officer’s permission. 
 
(3) 
The Superior Court held a contested VOP hearing on March 15, 
2011 at which Coates was represented by counsel.  At the conclusion of the 
hearing, the Superior Court found that Coates had violated the terms of his 
probation and sentenced him to two years at Level V incarceration to be 
suspended after serving one year for probation.  This appeal followed. 
 
(4) 
In his opening brief on appeal, Coates essentially contends that 
the evidence was insufficient to support the Superior Court’s VOP finding.  
Coates, however, has failed to provide this Court with a copy of the transcript 
of his contested VOP hearing.  Without the transcript, which Coates had the 
 
3
obligation to supply, the Court has no adequate basis upon which to review 
his claim of insufficient evidence.1  Moreover, Coates concedes in his 
opening brief that he missed curfews.  Although he offers excuses for missing 
curfew, his admission alone is sufficient to sustain the Superior Court’s 
finding that he had violated probation. 
  
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Randy J. Holland 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
                                                 
1 See Brittingham v. State, 2011 WL 378807 (Del. Feb. 1, 2011) (citing Tricoche v. State, 525 A.2d 151, 154 
(Del. 1987)).