Case Title: Meades v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: 56, 2024

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2024-05-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
ROBERT MEADES, 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 56, 2024 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§   
§  Cr. ID No. 1101020478  (S)  
§   
§   
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted:   April 17, 2024 
 
 
 
          Decided: 
May 16, 2024 
 
Before VALIHURA, TRAYNOR, and LEGROW, Justices. 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
After consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the appellee’s motion to 
affirm and the record on appeal, we conclude that the judgment below should be 
affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior Court in its 
February 1, 2024 order summarily dismissing the appellant’s fourth motion for 
postconviction relief and denying the appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel.  
The appellant’s fourth motion for postconviction relief was subject to summary 
dismissal under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(d)(2) because he was not convicted 
after trial, but instead pleaded guilty in 2012.1   
 
1 Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(d)(ii) (providing that a second or subsequent Rule 61 motion “shall be 
summarily dismissed, unless the movant was convicted after a trial and the motion” satisfies 
2 
 
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 
 
 
 
additional criteria).  See also Wonnum v. State, 2023 WL 329272, at *2 (Del. Jan. 19, 2023) 
(affirming the Superior Court’s dismissal of the defendant’s third motion for postconviction relief 
because he was not convicted after trial, but instead pleaded guilty).