Case Title: Johnson v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 125, 2022

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2022-08-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JONATHAN JOHNSON, 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
         Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 125, 2022 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§   
§  Cr. ID No. 1602004456A (N)  
§  
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: July 26, 2022 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
August 25, 2022 
 
Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VAUGHN and TRAYNOR, Justices. 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion 
to affirm, and the record on appeal, we conclude that the judgment below should be 
affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court’s order, dated March 22, 2022, 
summarily dismissing the appellant’s second motion for postconviction relief.  The 
appellant pleaded guilty1 and has not pleaded any circumstances under Rule 
 
1 DEL. SUPER. CT. CRIM. R. 61(d)(2) (providing that a second or subsequent motion for 
postconviction relief “shall be summarily dismissed, unless the movant was convicted after a trial 
and the motion” pleads with particularity either “that new evidence exists that creates a strong 
inference that the movant is actually innocent in fact of the acts underlying the charges of which 
he was convicted” or “a claim that a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on 
collateral review by the United States Supreme Court or the Delaware Supreme Court, applies to 
the movant’s case and renders the conviction . . . invalid”). 
2 
 
61(d)(2)(i) or (d)(2)(ii) that overcome the procedural bars set forth in Rule 61,2 nor 
does he claim that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction.3 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is 
GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Gary F. Traynor 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
2 Id. R. 61(i). 
3 Id. R. 61(i)(5).