IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

ROBERT PIPER , Defendant Below, Appellant,

v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Appellee. § § § No. 164, 2024 § § Court Below

— Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID No s . 2209003503 (S) § 2209003513 (S) § 2209003519 (S) § 2209006351 (S) Submitted: August 2, 2024 Decided: August 13, 2024 Before SEITZ , Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR , Justices. O RDER After consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal , it appears to the Court that: (1) The defendant below

- a ppellant, Robert Piper , filed this appeal from a Superior Court order dismissing his appeals from violation

- of

- probation (“VOP”) sentences imposed in the Court of Common Pleas

. For the reasons discussed below ,

we reverse the Superior Court’s judgment. (2) On December 13, 2023, the Court of Common Pleas found that Piper had violated his probation in four separate cases. The Court of Common Pleas sentenced Piper for the VOPs as follows: (i) for shoplifting in Cr. ID No. 220903503, one year of Level V incarceration, suspended after ninety days ; (ii) for shoplifting2

in Cr. ID No. 220903513, one year of Level V incarceration, suspended after ninety days; (iii) for shoplifting in Cr. ID No. 2209003519, one year of Level V incarceration, suspended after ninety days ; and (iv) for shoplifting in Cr. ID No. 2209006351 , one year of Level V incarceration , suspended after ninety days. (3) According to the dockets for the cases in the Court of Common Pleas, Piper filed a document request and affidavit in support of an application to proceed in forma pauperis on December 22 , 2023 . A Court of Common Pleas judge granted the application on December 27, 2023. The dockets next show a document received from Piper on February 12, 2024. In the document (which was captioned in the Superior Court) , Piper inquired about the status of his appeals, stating he had received a status sheet showing the granting of his application to proceed in forma pauperis but not showing anything for his appeals. In a letter dated February 15, 2024, the Court of Common Pleas told Piper that neither the Court of Common Pleas nor the Superior Court had received any appeals from him. (4) According to the docket for the cases in the Superior Court, Piper filed
a notice of appeal from the December 13, 2023 VOP sentences on March 6, 2024

. The Superior Court dismissed the appeals because they were filed more than fifteen days after the Court of Common Pleas had sentenced Piper for his VOPs . This appeal followed.3

(5) On appeal, Piper contends that he mailed his notice of appeal to the Superior Court on December 18, 2023. He includes a prison mail log showing that, on December 18, 2023, he mailed documents to the Sussex County Courthouse Prothonotary

. In denying the State’s motion to affirm, the Court directed the State
to address in its answering brief Piper’s contention that the prison mail log showed
he had mailed a timely notice of appeal to the Sussex County Prothonotary

. (6) The State admits in its answering brief that the Superior Court received Piper’s notice of appeal from the December 13, 2023 VOP sentences on December 22, 2023. The State includes a copy of th is notice of appeal, which is captioned in the Superior Court and marked with a December 22, 2023 Sussex County Prothonotary stamp , in its appendix

. Although the notice of appeal contained the case numbers for the Court of Common Pleas cases, the notice was mistakenly
entered and docketed in different cases that Pipe r already had pending in the Superior
Court. Attributing th is mistake to court

- related personnel, the State avers that the Superior Court erred in dismissing Piper’s appeal s as untimely

. (7) We agree that Piper’s appeal s to the Superior Court should not have been dismissed as untimel y . Under Superior Court Criminal Rule 39(a), Piper had to file his appeals within fifteen days from the date of his VOP sentences in the Court of Common Pleas. Piper was sentenced for his VOPs on December 13, 2023 so he had until December 28, 2023 to submit a timely appeal to the Superior Court . As4

demonstrated by the State, the Superior Court received Piper’s notice of appeal on December 22, 2023. The appeals were therefore timely and should not have been
dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is REVERSED. The matter is REMANDED for the Superior Court to
consider Piper’s appeal s from the Court of Common Pleas. Jurisdiction is not retained.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice