Title: Cooper v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
CURTIS COOPER, 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Appellee. 
§ 
§      No. 307, 2021 
§ 
§ 
§     Court Below—Superior Court 
§     of the State of Delaware 
§   
§     Cr. ID No. 1911001061  
§   
§ 
§ 
 
Submitted: June 27, 2022 
Decided:  August 8, 2022 
 
Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and TRAYNOR, Justices. 
 
ORDER 
 
After consideration of the brief and motion to withdraw filed by the 
appellant’s counsel under Supreme Court Rule 26(c), the State’s response, and the 
record on appeal, it appears to the Court that:   
(1) 
On July 9, 2021, a Superior Court jury found the appellant, Curtis 
Cooper, guilty of possession of heroin as a lesser included offense of drug dealing, 
aggravated possession of heroin, and resisting arrest in Cr. ID No. 1911001061.  The 
drug offenses merged for sentencing.  At sentencing on September 3, 2021, Cooper 
pleaded guilty to offensive touching and noncompliance with bond in Cr. ID No. 
2010005299.  The Superior Court sentenced Cooper as follows: (i) for aggravated 
possession, effective October 27, 2020, three years of Level V incarceration 
 
2 
suspended immediately for decreasing levels of supervision; (ii) for resisting arrest, 
one year of Level V incarceration suspended for one year of Level III probation; and 
(iii) for each conviction in Cr. ID No. 2010005299, thirty days of Level V 
incarceration suspended for one year of Level III probation.1  This is Cooper’s direct 
appeal in Cr. ID No. 1911001061.   
(2) 
On appeal, Cooper’s counsel (“Counsel”) filed a brief and a motion to 
withdraw under Rule 26(c).  Counsel asserts that, based upon a complete and careful 
examination of the record, there are no arguably appealable issues.  Counsel 
informed Cooper of the provisions of Rule 26(c) and provided him with a copy of 
the motion to withdraw and the accompanying brief.   
(3) 
Counsel also informed Cooper of his right to identify any points he 
wished this Court to consider on appeal.  Cooper has not provided points for this 
Court’s consideration.  The State has responded to the Rule 26(c) brief and has 
moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment.   
(4) 
When reviewing a motion to withdraw and an accompanying brief 
under Rule 26(c), this Court must: (i) be satisfied that defense counsel has made a 
conscientious examination of the record and the law for arguable claims; and (ii) 
conduct its own review of the record and determine whether the appeal is so totally 
 
1 We note that a modified sentencing order entered on October 28, 2021 includes a suspended 
sentenced for the possession of heroin conviction.  The sentencing order notes still correctly state 
that the possession charge merged with the aggravated possession charge for sentencing purposes.   
 
3 
devoid of at least arguably appealable issues that it can be decided without an 
adversary presentation.2 
(5) 
This Court has reviewed the record carefully and has concluded that 
Cooper’s appeal is wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable 
issue.  We also are satisfied that Counsel has made a conscientious effort to examine 
the record and the law and has properly determined that Cooper could not raise a 
meritorious claim on appeal.   
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior 
Court is AFFIRMED.  The motion to withdraw is moot. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/  James T. Vaughn, Jr. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
 
2 Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83 (1988); Leacock v. State, 690 A.2d 926, 927-28 (Del. 1996).