Title: Grantham v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 350, 2009
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: July 14, 2009

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
VICTOR GRANTHAM,  
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 350, 2009 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID No. 0808016406 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: June 29, 2009 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: July 14, 2009 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 14th day of July 2009, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
On February 19, 2009, the defendant-appellant, Victor 
Grantham, pleaded guilty to Murder in the Second Degree.  The record 
reflects that Grantham was sentenced in open court on May 1, 2009, and that 
the sentencing order was signed and docketed on May 11, 2009.  Any appeal 
from Grantham’s conviction and sentence should have been filed on or 
before June 10, 2009.1  However, Grantham did not file his pro se appeal in 
this Court until June 16, 2009.2       
                                                 
1 Supr. Ct. R. 6(a) (ii). 
2 Grantham filed what he called a “motion to appeal his sentence.” 
 
2 
 
(2) 
On June 17, 2009, the Clerk of the Court issued a notice to 
Grantham to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed as untimely 
filed.  Grantham responded by filing a notice of appeal on June 29, 2009.  In 
the notice of appeal, Grantham states that he told his attorney to file an 
appeal, but he did not do so. 
 
(3) 
Under these circumstances, and in the interest of justice, we 
conclude that this matter should be remanded to the Superior Court for a 
determination of whether Grantham instructed his attorney to file an appeal.3  
If the Superior Court determines that Grantham instructed his attorney to file 
an appeal, then its sentencing order should be vacated and Grantham re-
sentenced, with the assistance of counsel, so that a timely appeal may be 
filed.4   
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that this matter is hereby 
REMANDED to the Superior Court for further proceedings in accordance 
herewith.  Jurisdiction is not retained.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Henry duPont Ridgely 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
                                                 
3 Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 485 (2000). 
4 Id. at 478.