Title: Irwin v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
DANIEL P. IRWIN, 
 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 98, 2009 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Kent County 
§  Cr. ID Nos. 0409015984 and 
§  0502001603 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: April 13, 2009 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: May 11, 2009 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER, and JACOBS, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 11th day of May 2009, upon consideration of appellant’s opening brief 
and the State’s motion to affirm, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
The appellant, Daniel Irwin, filed this appeal from the Superior 
Court’s denial of his motion for credit for time previously served.  The State has 
filed a motion to affirm the judgment below on the ground that it is manifest on the 
face of Irwin’s opening brief that the appeal is without merit.  We agree and affirm. 
(2) 
The record reflects that Irwin was arrested on September 20, 2004 on 
a charge of third degree rape.  He was held in custody in lieu of bail.  Ultimately, 
he pled guilty on June 16, 2005 to two counts of third degree rape, charged under 
two different indictments.  The Superior Court sentenced him on September 29, 
 
2
2005 to a total period of thirty years at Level V imprisonment to be suspended after 
serving seven years for three years at decreasing levels of supervision.  Irwin did 
not appeal. 
(3) 
On December 8, 2008, Irwin filed a motion seeking credit for time 
previously served.  Irwin argued that he was entitled to be credited with the time he 
served in prison in lieu of bail following his September 2004 arrest until his 
September 2005 sentencing.  The Superior Court denied Irwin’s motion.  This 
appeal followed. 
(4) 
  After a review of the record, we find it manifest that the Superior 
Court’s denial of Irwin’s motion must be affirmed.  It is clear from the Superior 
Court’s September 29, 2005 sentencing order that Irwin was given credit for all of 
the time he served in prison prior to his sentencing.  The sentencing order 
specifically provides that the effective date of Irwin’s sentence is September 20, 
2004, the date of his arrest.  Accordingly, Irwin received credit for all time 
previously served.  There is no merit to his appeal. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior 
Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Carolyn Berger  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice