Title: Biggins v. State

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JAMES A. BIGGINS, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 495, 2007 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Sussex County 
§  Cr. ID 9609015504 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: September 27, 2007 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
November 20, 2007 
 
Before BERGER, JACOBS, and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 20th day of November 2007, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The appellant, James Biggins, filed this appeal from a decision of 
the Superior Court, dated August 30, 2007, which denied Biggins’ request for 
transcripts.  The Clerk of the Court issued a notice to Biggins to show cause 
why his appeal should not be dismissed based on the Court’s lack of 
jurisdiction to entertain an interlocutory appeal in a criminal case. 
(2) 
Biggins filed a response to the notice to show cause on 
September 27, 2007.  Biggins’ response does not squarely address the 
jurisdictional defect raised in the notice to show cause but instead argues the 
merits of his request for transcript. 
 
2
 
(3) 
Under the Delaware Constitution, this Court may only review a 
final judgment in a criminal case.1  The Superior Court’s denial of Biggins’ 
request for transcript in order to pursue a postconviction remedy is clearly an 
unappealable interlocutory ruling.2  As a result, this Court does not have 
jurisdiction to review this appeal.3 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the within appeal is 
DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
                                                 
1 Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b). 
2 See Robinson v. State, 704 A.2d 269, 271 (Del. 1998). 
3 See Gottlieb v. State, 697 A.2d 400 (Del. 1997).