Title: Burrows v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
WILLIAM BURROWS, 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Appellee. 
§ 
§   
§  No. 99, 2022 
§ 
§  Court Below: Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§   
§  Cr. I.D. No. 1507008924 (N) 
§   
§ 
 
Submitted: April 26, 2022 
Decided: 
May 5, 2022 
 
Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices. 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
After consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant’s response, 
it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
On March 21, 2022, the Court received a letter from the appellant, 
Williams Burrows, expressing his desire to appeal from a Superior Court order dated 
February 7, 2022, and docketed on February 8, 2022, that denied his motion for 
reduction or modification of sentence.  The Senior Court Clerk deemed the letter to 
be a notice of appeal and issued a notice directing Burrows to show cause why the 
appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed.  Under Supreme Court Rules 6 and 
11, a timely notice of appeal should have been filed on or before March 10, 2022.   
 
2 
(2) 
In response to the notice to show cause, Burrows states that he sent a 
notice of appeal on April 3, 2022—later than the letter that was deemed to be his 
notice of appeal—and indicates that he believed the deadline to appeal to be April 
5, 2022.  A notice of appeal must be timely filed to invoke the Court’s appellate 
jurisdiction.1  A notice of appeal must be received by the Court within the applicable 
time period to be effective.2  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.3  An appellant's pro se, incarcerated status does not 
excuse a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional requirements of Supreme 
Court Rule 6.4  The failure to file a timely appeal in this case is not attributable to 
court-related personnel.  Therefore, the appeal must be dismissed. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), 
that the appeal is DISMISSED.  
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Karen L. Valihura 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice  
 
 
1 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989). 
2 DEL. SUPR. CT. R. 10(a). 
3 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). 
4 Hughes v. State, 2019 WL 1723098 (Del. Apr. 15, 2019).