Title: Matter of Petition of Fatire
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 355, 2007
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: September 19, 2007

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
PETITION OF AMIR FATIR FOR 
A WRIT OF CERTIORARI 
§ 
§  No. 355, 2007 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: August 6, 2007 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: September 19, 2007 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and BERGER, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 19th day of September 2007, upon consideration of the petition 
for a writ of certiorari, and the State’s answer and motion to dismiss, it 
appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The petitioner, Amir Fatir, seeks to invoke this Court’s original 
jurisdiction to issue an extraordinary writ of certiorari.1  Fatir claims that his 
conviction of Murder in the First Degree must be vacated in light of this 
Court’s ruling in Chao v. State.2  The State of Delaware has filed an answer 
and motion to dismiss.  We conclude that Fatir’s petition manifestly fails to 
invoke the original jurisdiction of this Court.  Accordingly, the petition must 
be dismissed. 
 
(2) 
A writ of certiorari is an extraordinary remedy that is available 
only in limited circumstances and when no other adequate remedy is 
                                          
 
1 Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(6). 
2 Chao v. State, 2007 WL 1774963 (Del. Supr.). 
 
2
available.3  In certiorari, review generally is confined to jurisdictional 
matters, errors of law, or procedural irregularities that are manifest on the 
record.4 
 
(3) 
Because Fatir’s claim concerning his murder conviction may be 
advanced in post conviction proceedings, he has failed to demonstrate that 
no other adequate remedy is available to him.5  As such, Fatir is not entitled 
to the issuance of a writ of certiorari. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Fatir’s petition for a writ 
of certiorari is DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Randy J. Holland 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
 
                                          
 
3 Shoemaker v. State, 375 A.2d 431, 437-38 (Del. 1977). 
4 Haskins v. Williams, Del. Supr., No. 633, Steele, C.J. (Mar. 8, 2007); Vincent v. State, 
Del. Supr., No. 232, 2006, Jacobs, J. (Sept. 26, 2006). 
5 In fact, Fatir states in his petition that his appeal of the Superior Court’s denial of his 
motion for postconviction relief is presently before this Court.