Title: Winchester v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
RAYMOND WINCHESTER, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 451, 2015 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID 1408023564 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: August 28, 2015 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: August 31, 2015 
 
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; HOLLAND, and SEITZ, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 31st day of August 2015, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
On August 20, 2015, the Court received the appellant Raymond 
Winchester’s notice of appeal from a Superior Court violation of probation 
sentencing order entered on July 16, 2015.  Under Supreme Court Rule 
6(a)(ii), a timely notice of appeal should have been filed on or before August 
17, 2015. 
(2) 
The Clerk issued a notice directing Winchester to show cause 
why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed.  Winchester filed 
a response to the notice to show cause on August 28, 2015.  He asserts that 
 
 
-2- 
his appeal was untimely because he thought that he was supposed to file his 
papers by leaving them with the Department of Justice.  
(3) 
Winchester’s response is unavailing.  Time is a jurisdictional 
requirement.1  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.2  An 
appellant’s pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the 
jurisdictional requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6.3  Unless an appellant 
can demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is 
attributable to court-related personnel, an untimely appeal cannot be 
considered.4  Winchester’s case does not fall within this exception.   
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is 
DISMISSED. 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr. 
 
Chief Justice 
                                                 
1Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989). 
2Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a). 
3Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481, 486-87 (Del. 2012). 
4Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).