Title: Matter of Manis

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

1State v.  Manis, Del.  Super., No.  9812000028, Silverman, J.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
§
PETITION OF GORDON L.  
§
No.  68, 2002
MANIS FOR A WRIT OF
§
MANDAMUS.
§
Def.  ID No. 9812000028
Submitted: March 4, 2002
Decided:
April 1, 2002
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and STEELE, Justices.
O R D E R
This 1st day of April 2002, upon consideration of the petition for a writ
of mandamus filed by Gordon L.  Manis, and the answer and motion to
dismiss filed by the State of Delaware, it appears to the Court that:
(1)
By sentencing order dated January 7, 2000, as later modified on
February 17, 2000, and October 26, 2001, the Superior Court sentenced
Manis to a total of 15 years imprisonment, suspended after 30 months for 7½
years at Level IV home confinement, suspended after 18 months, for the
balance at Level III probation.1  Manis was ordered to be held at Level V
imprisonment pending his transfer to Level IV home confinement.    
(2)
Anticipating the completion of the Level V portion of his
sentence, Manis, on February 11, 2002, filed a writ of mandamus directed to
2In re Bordley, 545 A.2d 619, 620 (Del. 1988).
2
the Superior Court to compel a further modification of his sentence.
According to Manis, without a modification, he would remain at Level V
indefinitely because of problems he would encounter arranging for Level IV
home confinement.  
(3)
As a prerequisite for mandamus relief, a petitioner seeking a writ
of mandamus must show that there is no adequate remedy at law.2  In this
case, Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b) provides an adequate remedy at law
for Manis to request a modification of sentence.  Consequently, there is no
basis for the issuance of a writ of mandamus.  Moreover, it appears that
Manis’ petition is moot.  By order dated February 21, 2002, the Superior
Court modified Manis’ sentence to provide that he should be held at Level III
while awaiting placement in any Level IV program.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to
dismiss is GRANTED.  Manis’ petition for a writ of mandamus is
DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ E. Norman Veasey
Chief Justice