IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

 

SHANNON WATTERSON, § 

 § No. 16, 2014 

 Defendant Below, § 

Appellant, § Court Below–Superior Court of 

 § the State of Delaware in and for 

v. § New Castle County 

 § 

STATE OF DELAWARE, § 

 § 

 Plaintiff Below, § Cr. ID No. 1211021824 

 Appellee. § 

Submitted: June 23, 2014 

Decided: June 27, 2014 

Before STRINE, Chief Justice, BERGER and RIDGELY, Justices. 

O R D E R

 This 27th day of June 2014, upon consideration of the appellee’s 

motion to dismiss and the appellant’s response to the motion, it appears to 

the Court that: 

(1) On September 16, 2013, the appellant, Shannon Watterson, 

pled guilty, with the assistance of defense counsel, to Assault in the Second 

Degree and misdemeanor Endangering the Welfare of a Child. On 

December 6, 2013, the Superior Court sentenced Watterson to a total of nine 

years at Level V suspended after five years and one month for two and one-
2 

half years at Level IV suspended after six months for decreasing levels of 

supervision. 

(2) On January 9, 2014, Watterson, acting pro se, filed a notice of 

appeal from the December 6, 2013 sentence. Upon receipt of Watterson’s 

pro se appeal, the Clerk directed Watterson’s defense counsel to recognize 

counsel’s continuing obligation to represent Watterson on appeal by filing a 

formal notice of appeal, if appropriate, on or before January 21, 2014. 

Watterson’s defense counsel (hereinafter “Counsel”) filed a formal notice of 

appeal on January 20, 2014. 

(3) On June 11, 2014, the appellee, State of Delaware, filed a 

motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely filed. The State alleged that the 

notice of appeal should have been filed no later than January 6, 2014 and 

was not. In response to the motion to dismiss, Watterson’s Counsel “does 

not dispute the factual or legal assertions set forth in the Motion to Dismiss.” 

(4) The appellate jurisdiction of this Court rests upon perfecting an 

appeal with the applicable time period.1

 In a direct appeal of a criminal 

conviction, a notice of appeal must be filed “within 30 days after a sentence 

is imposed.”2 

 

1 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989). 

2

 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(ii). 
3 

(5) In Delaware, the jurisdictional defect that is created by the 

untimely filing of a notice of appeal cannot be excused “in the absence of 

unusual circumstances which are not attributable to the appellant or the 

appellant’s attorney.”3

 An untimely appeal cannot be considered unless an

appellant can demonstrate that the failure to timely file a notice of appeal is 

attributable to court-related personnel.4

(6) In this case, Watterson’s notice of appeal should have been 

filed on or before January 6, 2014, and was not filed until January 9, 2014. 

As a result, the appeal was untimely filed. Moreover, because Watterson’s 

Counsel does not contend, and the record does not reflect, that the 

untimeliness of the appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, the 

appeal must be dismissed. 

(7) Under the unique circumstances of this case, when Counsel had 

a continuing obligation to appeal if that was Watterson’s desire, we conclude 

that this matter should be remanded to the Superior Court to determine if 

Watterson consulted with Counsel and expressed a desire to appeal.5 If the 

Superior Court determines that Watterson told Counsel that she wanted to 

 

3

See Honaker v. State, 2006 WL 298165 (Del. Feb. 6, 2006) (quoting Riggs v. Riggs, 539 

A.2d 163, 164 (Del. 1988)). 

4

Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). 

5

See Del. Supr. Ct. R. 26(a) (providing for continuing obligation of and representation by 

counsel on appeal). 
4 

appeal, the Superior Court should vacate its December 6, 2013 sentencing 

order and resentence Watterson, with the assistance of new counsel, so that a 

timely appeal might be filed. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 

29(b), that the motion to dismiss is GRANTED. This appeal is DISMISSED 

as untimely filed and REMANDED to the Superior Court for further 

proceedings in accordance with this Order. Jurisdiction is not retained. 

 BY THE COURT: 

 

 /s/ Henry duPont Ridgely

 Justice