Title: Johnson v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
DERIOUS J. JOHNSON,  
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE,  
 
           Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  Nos. 458 and 471, 20131 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID No. 9709002535 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
                                         Submitted: September 27, 2013 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: September 30, 2013 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 30th day of September 2013, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
On September 9, 2013, the Court received the appellant’s notice 
of appeal from the Superior Court’s order denying his motion for 
postconviction relief, which was dated and docketed on February 27, 2013.  
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 6, a timely notice of appeal from the 
Superior Court’s order should have been filed on or before March 29, 2013.   
                                                 
1 When the appellant originally filed this appeal, it was docketed as No. 458, 2013.  The 
Clerk subsequently requested the appellant to file an official Form A Notice of Appeal.  
When the official form was filed, the matter was erroneously re-docketed as No. 471, 
2013.   We, therefore, hereby consolidate those two appeals for purposes of this final 
Order. 
 
2
 
(2) 
On September 9, 2013, the Clerk issued a notice pursuant to 
Rule 29(b) directing the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not 
be dismissed as untimely filed.  The appellant filed a response to the notice 
to show cause on September 27, 2013.  The appellant states that he sent the 
notice of appeal to the wrong address and did not receive the letter back 
from the Post Office until August 1, 2013.   
 
(3) 
Pursuant to Rule 6(a) (iii), a notice of appeal in any proceeding 
for postconviction relief must be filed within 30 days after entry upon the 
docket of the judgment or order being appealed.  Time is a jurisdictional 
requirement.2  A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk 
of this Court within the applicable time period in order to be effective.3  An 
appellant’s pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the 
jurisdictional requirements of Rule 6.4  Unless the appellant can demonstrate 
that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related 
personnel, his appeal may not be considered.5 
 
(4) 
There is nothing in the record before us reflecting that the 
appellant’s failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-
related personnel.  Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception 
                                                 
2 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989). 
3 Supr. Ct. R. 10(a). 
4 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d at 779. 
5 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). 
 
3
to the general rule mandating the timely filing of a notice of appeal.  Thus, 
the Court concludes that this appeal must be dismissed. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court 
Rule 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice