IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE, )

)

v. ) ID No. 2109011647

)

LARRY SAUNDERS, )

Defendant. )

ORDER

On this 3rd day of August, 2023, upon consideration of Defendant, Larry 

Saunder’s (“Defendant”) pro se Motion for Sentence Modification (the “Motion”),1

the sentence imposed upon Defendant, and the record in this case, it appears to the 

Court that:

1. Defendant was Indicted in this Court on November 22, 2021, on various

drug, weapon and child endangering charges. On the date and time set for 

Defendant’s trial, May 15, 2023, Defendant pled guilty to the charges of Possession 

of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited (hereinafter “PFBPP”), Drug Dealing, and 

Possession of Ammunition by a Person Prohibited (hereinafter “PABPP”). Per the 

plea agreement between Defendant, acting pro se with standby counsel appointed, 

Defendant was sentenced immediately to: PFBPP - fifteen (15) years at Level V, 

suspended after twelve (12) years, six (6) months2for two (2) years Level IV (DOC 

1 State v. Larry Saunders, Crim. ID No. 2109011647, D.I. 71.

2 The first ten (10) years of the Level V time is minimum mandatory time pursuant 

to 11 Del. C. § 1448.
2

Discretion), suspended after six (6) months for eighteen (18) months at supervision 

Level III; Drug Dealing – eight (8) years at Level V suspended for eighteen (18) 

months concurrent Level III probation; PABPP – eight (8) years at Level V 

suspended for eighteen (18) months concurrent Level III probation. The Defendant 

was sentenced in accordance with the terms reached in the plea agreement,

3

and the 

sentence was a joint recommendation between the State and Defendant. 

2. On July 28, 2023, Defendant filed the instant Motion for Modification 

of his sentence requesting that his Level V time be limited to the ten (10) year 

minimum mandatory time, as opposed to the twelve and a half (12.5) years received.

This motion cites to Defendant’s “Professional Achievements & Community 

Contributions”, “Entrepreneurial Success”, “Remorse and Grown Through 

Hindsight”, “Personal and Family Circumstances” and finally has a section entitled, 

“Statutory Minimum.”4 Other than the arguments relating to the statutory minimum 

being appropriate here, these topics were presented and considered at the time of 

sentencing. In fact, a discussion was held with Defendant regarding his professional 

and familial accomplishments during sentencing.5

3 The only modification made at sentencing was that the LIV time was to be served 

at DOC discretion as opposed to the designated Work Release on the plea

paperwork. 

4 See Sections A-E in Defendant’s Motion.

5 D.I. 68.
3

3. Under Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b), “the court may reduce a

sentence of imprisonment on a motion made within 90 days after the sentence is 

imposed. This period shall not be interrupted or extended by an appeal, except that 

a motion may be made within 90 days of the imposition of sentence after remand for 

a new trial or for resentencing. The court may decide the motion or defer decision 

while an appeal is pending. Further, the Court may decide the motion without 

presentation or formal hearing.”

6

4. Given that this motion was filed within ninety (90) days of Defendant’s

sentencing, the motion is timely. 

5. Although timely, the motion is still without merit. The sentence in this

case was imposed pursuant to a Plea Agreement between the State and the 

Defendant. Defendant represented himself, at his insistence following a full 

colloquy at an earlier proceeding.7 In so self-representing, Defendant both 

negotiated and signed the plea agreement. In fact, it was Defendant who reached 

out to the State to reinitiate plea negotiations on the morning of trial. Shortly 

thereafter, the plea was placed upon the record and formally accepted.

8

 Pursuant to 

Criminal Procedural Rule 11(c)(1), the Court addressed Defendant in open court and 

determined that the Defendant understood the nature of the charge to which the plea 

6 Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(b).

7 D.I. 57. Alicea Brown, Esquire was ordered to remain as stand-by counsel, only.

8 D.I. 68.
4

was offered, the mandatory minimum penalty provided by law, as well as the 

maximum possible penalty provided by law. Accordingly, Defendant acknowledged 

in open court that the range of possible penalties included the sentence that was 

imposed by the Court in this case.9

6. Defendant presents no new information in this motion that would 

warrant modification. The sentence is appropriate for all the reasons stated at the 

time of sentencing. No additional information has been provided to the Court which 

would warrant a reduction or modification of this sentence.

7. While Defendant represented himself throughout the relevant 

proceedings, and is technically doing so here, it is notable to the Court that included

by Defendant with the motion is an updated letter from “Legal Support Services 

Office Criminal Offenders Legal Advocacy Group”.10 The signature on the letter 

cannot be made out, and while there is no Delaware Bar Identification Number, the 

author presents an American Bar Association Identification Number. This letter 

makes it clear that the instant Motion for Sentence Modification was prepared by the

letter’s sender, and not Defendant. The letter also makes it clear that this “Legal 

Advocacy Group” will “continue to advocate tirelessly in the other matters you have 

9

Id.

10 The heading on the letterhead includes contact information, one of which is a 

social media contact of: https://www.facebook.com/selfrep.org
5

hired us to assist with [sic].” Despite the Court’s concerns regarding the 

unauthorized practice of law,11 the Court accepted and fully considered the instant 

motion, however a copy of Defendant’s motion, the referenced letter and this Order 

will be sent to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for any action they deem 

appropriate. 

Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion for Modification of Sentence is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Danielle J. Brennan

Danielle J. Brennan, Judge

Original to Prothonotary

Cc: Larry Saunders (SBI #00531369)

Dominic Carrera, DAG

Alicea Brown, Esquire

David White, Esquire, Office of Disciplinary Counsel

Kathleen Vavala, Esquire, Office of Disciplinary Counsel

11 See Delaware Trial Handbook § 1:7: https://www.delawgroup.com/delawaretrial-handbook-%C2%A7-17-the-need-for-counsel-to-be-admitted-to-practice-law/