Title: Layton v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 585, 2012
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: December 18, 2012

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
SAMUEL LAYTON, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 585, 2012 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Sussex County 
§  Cr. ID 0205011859 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted:  November 20, 2012 
 
 
 
 
  Decided:  December 18, 2012 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 18th day of December 2012, we have carefully considered the 
appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion to affirm, and the record on 
appeal.  We find it manifest that the judgment below should be affirmed for 
the reasons set forth in the Superior Court’s decision dated September 25, 
2012. The Superior Court did not err in concluding that the claims raised in 
the appellant’s third motion for postconviction relief were procedurally 
barred by the provisions of Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(i)(1), (i)(2), 
(i)(3), and/or (i)(4) and that appellant had failed to overcome these 
procedural hurdles. 
 
2
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice