Title: Norwood v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 141, 2002
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: March 28, 2002

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
THOMAS E. NORWOOD,
     
Defendant Below,
     
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF DELAWARE,
     
Plaintiff Below,
     
Appellee.
§  No. 141, 2002
§
§
§
§
§  Court Below: Superior Court
§  of the State of Delaware,
§  in and for Sussex County
§  Cr. ID No. 0107006910
§
§
Submitted: March 20, 2002
  Decided:
March 28, 2002
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and HOLLAND, Justices.
O R D E R
This 28TH day of March 2002, it appears to the Court that:
(1)
 On March 20, 2002, the defendant, Thomas E. Norwood, filed a
pro se notice of appeal, attempting to appeal a sentence that has not yet been
imposed.  The defendant’s sentencing is currently scheduled for April 26, 2002.
(2)
This Court’s appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases is limited to
appeals from final judgments.1  A criminal conviction is not a final, appealable
judgment until the defendant has been sentenced.2 The defendant’s appeal in
                                                 
1  DEL. CONST. ART. IV, § 11(1)(b); Grossberg v. State, Del. Supr., No. 307, 1997,
Veasey, C.J. (July 25, 1997).
2  See Perry v. State, 575 A.2d 1154, 1155 (Del. 1990).
-2-
this case manifestly fails to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court.  Furthermore,
a defendant represented by counsel may not act pro se.  Counsel is the only
person who is authorized to act on behalf of the defendant.3
(3)
The Court has concluded, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(c),
that the appeal, on its face, manifestly fails to invoke this Court’s jurisdiction
and that, in the exercise of the Court’s discretion, the giving of notice of
dismissal would serve no meaningful purpose and that any response thereto
would be of no avail.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court
Rules 6 and 29(c), that the within appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte.
BY THE COURT:
    s/Joseph T. Walsh
Justice
                                                 
3  In the Matter of Haskins, 551 A.2d 65, 66 (Del. 1988).