Title: Smith v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 542, 2012
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: October 31, 2012

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
FREDERICK W. SMITH, JR., 
 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 542, 2012 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID 93007368DI 
§   
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: October 12, 2012 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: October 31, 2012 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS, and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 31st day of October 2012, upon consideration of the appellant’s 
opening brief and the State’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to 
affirm, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The appellant, Frederick Smith, filed this appeal from a 
decision of the Superior Court, dated September 12, 2012, denying his 
motion to compel.  Smith sought to compel the Department of Justice to 
correct alleged perjury that occurred in the 1993 proceedings that led to his 
conviction for multiple sex offenses.   The State of Delaware has filed a 
motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to affirm.  
 
2
 
(2) 
The issue raised in Smith’s motion to compel is an attack on an 
alleged inconsistency between the 1993 indictment against him and the 
testimony presented at his trial.  This Court previously has held that, based 
on his history of excessive litigation, Smith is collaterally estopped from 
raising this claim.1  Accordingly, the Superior Court committed no error or 
abuse in denying Smith’s most recent “motion to compel.” 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Henry duPont Ridgely 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
                                                 
1 See Smith v. State, 2009 WL 2888258 (Del. Sept. 10, 2009).