Title: Robinson v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
CHARLES M. ROBINSON,
§
§
No.  415, 2003
Defendant Below,
§
Appellant,
§
Court Below–Superior Court
§
of the State of Delaware, in and
v.
§
for Sussex County in VS01-
§
12-0557-02.
STATE OF DELAWARE,
§
§
Plaintiff Below,
§
Appellee.
§
Def.  ID No.  0112008933
Submitted: May 11, 2004
Decided:
July 20, 2004
Before HOLLAND, BERGER and JACOBS, Justices.
O R D E R
This 20  day of July 2004, upon consideration of the appellant’s opening
th
brief, the appellee’s motion to affirm and the appellant’s motion for stay, it
appears to the Court that:
(1)
On June 19, 2002, the appellant, Charles M.  Robinson, pleaded
guilty to Rape in the Fourth Degree and was sentenced to ten years at Level V,
suspended for one year at Level IV Home Confinement followed by decreasing
levels of probation.  On November 8, 2002, Robinson was found guilty of
violating his Level IV Home Confinement.  His sentencing was continued,
however, at the request of his probation officer so that psychological and
psychiatric examinations could be performed on him at the Delaware
Psychiatric Center.  In the interim, however, the Department of Correction
conducted its own mental health evaluation of Robinson.  After considering the
Department of Correction’s evaluation, the Superior Court withdrew its order
for psychological and psychiatric testing at the Delaware Psychiatric Center and
rescheduled sentencing on the violation of probation.  Robinson was sentenced,
as later corrected, to ten years at Level V, suspended for one year at Level IV
Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Program, followed by decreasing levels
of probation.  
(2)
On July 2, 2003, Robinson was unsuccessfully discharged from the
Crest South Residential Drug Treatment Program.  At a violation of probation
hearing on July 22, 2003, Robinson was found guilty of violation of probation,
and he was sentenced.  This appeal followed.
(3)
In his opening brief on appeal, Robinson contends that he was
mentally incompetent at the July 22, 2003 sentencing, and that, as a result, he
By Order dated February 25, 2004, this Court considered, and denied, a  prior
“Motion for a Stay of Proceedings and Competency Determination” on the basis that
Robinson had not provided documentary evidence to support his mental health claim on
appeal or to suggest that there had been any change in his mental status since his VOP
hearing in July 2003, at which time the Superior Court considered and rejected Robinson’s
request for a psychiatric evaluation.
was denied a fair trial.  In his motion for stay, Robinson seeks a stay of this
appeal on the basis that he has filed an action in the United States District Court
of Delaware against the Department of Correction for the release of his medical
records.  
1
(4)
Robinson has not demonstrated that a stay is necessary for a
determination of the issues in this appeal.  In the event Robinson acquires
medical information that reflects a change in his mental health status and thus
the alleged need for a change in his sentence, he may submit that information
to the Superior Court for consideration.
(5)
It appears from the record that Robinson raised the state of his
mental health at the July 22, 2003 sentencing.  Robinson represented to the
Superior Court at that time that he had been “diagnosed with schizophrenia,”
had “been hearing voices in my head for quite some time,” and that his prison
counselor had recommended that he “be placed at the Delaware Psychiatric
Center to get help with this problem.”   Robinson’s latter representation was
2
disputed, however, both by the Treatment Access Center case manager and the
probation officer, as well as by the violation of probation report dated July 11,
2003, that was filed in the Superior Court.
(6)
The Superior Court ultimately rejected Robinson’s request for
placement at the Delaware Psychiatric Center and sentenced him instead to nine
years at Level V, suspended, after successful completion of the Family
Problems Program and the Key Program, for one year at Level IV Crest,
suspended upon successful completion, for decreasing levels of probation.  The
Superior Court allowed, however, that it would “consider anything that is
appropriate if there is a change in circumstances or information.”3
(7)
After careful consideration of the parties’ respective positions and
the record below, we find it manifest that the judgment of the Superior Court
should be affirmed.  On the record before us, we find no substantiation of
Robinson’s claim that he was incompetent at the time of sentencing or that the
Superior Court disregarded his claim as to his mental status.   
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Robinson’s motion for stay
is DENIED.  The State’s motion to affirm is GRANTED.  The judgment of the
Superior Court is AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Carolyn Berger
Justice