Title: Brown v. Department of Correction

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JERON D. BROWN, 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
No. 391, 2010 
 
Petitioner Below,  
 
§ 
 
Appellant,  
 
 
§ 
Court Below–Superior Court of  
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
the State of Delaware, in and for 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
New Castle County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, § 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
Respondent Below,  
 
§ 
C.A. No. N10M-06-002 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
Submitted: August 4, 2011 
Decided: 
August 5, 2011 
Corrected: August 11, 2011 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 11th day of August 2011, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The appellant, Jeron D. Brown, filed an appeal from the Superior 
Court’s June 3, 2010 summary dismissal of his petition for a writ of mandamus.  
By Order dated April 12, 2011, we remanded the case with jurisdiction retained 
and asked that the Superior Court file an order supply its rationale for dismissing 
Brown’s mandamus petition. 
(2) 
On remand, the Superior Court issued an order dated May 9, 2011, 
concluding that Brown’s mandamus petition was “devoid of any information from 
which the Court could determine that DOC’s calculation of [Brown’s] meritorious 
good time credit days at the time his petition was filed denied him additional 
2 
 
credits to which he was entitled.”  The Superior Court also suggested that the 
matter was moot due to Brown’s release from incarceration during the pendency of 
this appeal. 
(3) 
Upon return of the matter from remand, the Clerk issued a notice 
dated June 28, 2011 directing that Brown show cause1 why this appeal should not 
be dismissed as moot.2  The Clerk sent a copy of the notice to Brown by first class 
mail on July 21, 2011.3   Brown has not responded to either the June 28 or July 21 
notices to show cause.  For that reason, dismissal of Brown’s appeal is deemed to 
be unopposed.4 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme 
Court Rules 3(b)(2) and 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
       Justice 
                                            
1 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 29(b) 
2 “A legal action becomes moot when a controversy between the parties no longer exists due to 
the occurrence of events following the filing of the action.”  See Johnson v. State, 2001 WL 
2438695 (Del. Supr.) (citing Mentor Graphics Corp. v. Shapiro, 818 A.2d 959, 962-63 (Del. 
2003)). 
3 The July 21 notice was mailed to Brown at an updated address listed on the docket. 
4 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 3(b)(2), 29(b).