Title: Rust v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
RODGER L. RUST, 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
No. 101, 2011 
 
Defendant Below,  
§ 
 
Appellant,  
 
§ 
Court Below–Superior Court of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
the State of Delaware, in and for 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Sussex County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
§ 
Cr. ID No. 0912005406 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
§ 
 
Submitted: June 6, 2011 
Decided: 
August 31, 2011 
 
Before BERGER, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 31st day of August 2011, upon consideration of the appellant’s opening 
brief and the appellee’s motion to affirm, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
The appellant, Rodger L. Rust, filed this appeal from the Superior 
Court’s February 8, 2011 denial of his second motion for modification of sentence 
pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b) (“Rule 35(b)”).  The appellee, 
State of Delaware, has moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment on the 
ground that it is manifest on the face of the opening brief that the appeal is without 
merit.  We agree and affirm. 
 
(2) 
On May 10, 2010, Rust pled guilty/no contest to three offenses:  
Trafficking in Cocaine, Maintaining a Dwelling for Keeping Controlled 
2 
 
Substances, and Possession of a Deadly Weapon (Ammunition) by a Person 
Prohibited.  As part of the plea agreement, Rust agreed to forfeit a firearm, 
currency and two vehicles.   
(3) 
Rust was sentenced on June 25, 2010 after a presentence 
investigation.  For the trafficking offense, Rust was sentenced to twenty-five years 
at Level V incarceration suspended after eight years – four years mandatory – for 
one year at Level IV work release followed by probation.  For the other offenses, 
Rust was sentenced to a total of eleven more years at Level V suspended 
immediately for probation. 
(4) 
On August 31, 2010, within ninety days of sentencing, Rust filed his 
first motion for modification of sentence pursuant to Rule 35(b).  Rust asked that 
the Superior Court suspend the unsuspended Level V portion of his sentence after 
he finished serving the four years of mandatory incarceration and completed one or 
more therapeutic programs designated by the court.  By order dated September 3, 
2010, the Superior Court denied Rust’s motion on the basis that the sentence 
imposed on June 25, 2010 was reasonable and appropriate. 
(5) 
On February 1, 2011, Rust filed his second motion for modification of 
sentence.  Rust asked that the Superior Court modify his sentence to require 
successful completion of the Key Program and twelve months at the Crest 
Program.  Rust also sought the “immediate return of forfeited vehicles.” 
3 
 
(6) 
By order dated February 8, 2011, the Superior Court denied Rust’s 
second motion for modification of sentence for the reasons given in the court’s 
September 3, 2010 order, which had concluded that the sentence was reasonable 
and appropriate.  The Superior Court also sent Rust a copy of the court’s order 
regarding the forfeiture of property.  This appeal followed. 
(7) 
In his opening brief on appeal, Rust claims that the Superior Court’s 
February 8, 2011 denial of his second motion for modification of sentence was an 
abuse of discretion.  The claim is without merit.  Under Rule 35(b), Rust’s second 
motion for modification of sentence was both repetitive and untimely.1  In the 
absence of “extraordinary circumstances,” the Superior Court properly denied the 
motion.2 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to affirm is 
GRANTED.  The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs 
 
 
 
 
 
       Justice 
 
                                            
1 See Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(b) (providing that a motion must be filed within ninety days of 
sentencing and that the court will not consider “repetitive requests”). 
2 Id. (providing that the court will consider a motion filed more than ninety days after sentencing 
only in extraordinary circumstances).