Title: Webb v. Taylor
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 543, 2005
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: May 31, 2006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
WILLIAM JOSEPH WEBB, JR., 
 
Petitioner Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
COMMISSIONER STANLEY 
TAYLOR and WARDEN THOMAS 
CARROLL, 
 
Respondents Below- 
Appellees. 
§ 
§  No. 543, 2005 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  C.A. No. 05M-09-103 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: March 24, 2006 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: May 31, 2006 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 31st day of May 2006, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The petitioner-appellant, William Joseph Webb, Jr., filed an 
appeal from the Superior Court’s September 30, 2005 order denying his 
petition for a writ of habeas corpus.  We find no merit to the appeal.  
Accordingly, we AFFIRM. 
 
(2) 
In May 1997, Webb pleaded guilty to Burglary in the Second 
Degree.  He was sentenced to 8 years of Level V incarceration, to be 
suspended after 1 year for 7 years probation.  In March 2000, Webb pleaded 
guilty to the additional charges of Burglary in the First Degree, Assault in 
 
2
the First Degree and Endangering the Welfare of a Child.  He also admitted 
to a probation violation.  On the burglary conviction, Webb was sentenced to 
12 years of Level V incarceration, to be suspended after 5 years for 
decreasing levels of probation.1  On the assault conviction, he was sentenced 
to 30 months of Level V incarceration, to be suspended after 24 months for 
probation.  On the conviction of endangering the welfare of a child, Webb 
was sentenced to 12 months of Level V incarceration, to be suspended for 
probation.  Finally, on his probation violation, he was sentenced to 3 years 
of Level V incarceration.     
 
(3) 
In his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Webb claimed that 
the Superior Court judge improperly relied upon his May 1997 conviction 
when imposing his March 2000 sentences.  In this appeal, Webb claims that 
the Superior Court incorrectly failed to: treat his petition for a writ of habeas 
corpus as a postconviction motion under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61; 
bring him into court for an evidentiary hearing;2 and issue the writ of habeas 
corpus “without delay.”3   
                                                 
1 The Superior Court subsequently reduced this sentence to 10 years at Level V. 
2 Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 6908. 
3 Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 6906. 
 
3
 
(4) 
In Delaware, the writ of habeas corpus provides relief on a very 
limited basis.4  Habeas corpus only provides “an opportunity for one 
illegally confined or incarcerated to obtain judicial review of the jurisdiction 
of the court ordering the commitment.”5  “Habeas corpus relief is not 
available to ‘[p]ersons committed or detained on a charge of treason or 
felony, the species whereof is plainly and fully set forth in the 
commitment.’”6   
 
(5) 
There is no basis for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus in 
this case.  Webb has not demonstrated that the Superior Court lacked 
jurisdiction over the charges against him or that the indictment was invalid 
on its face.  Webb also has failed to demonstrate any error or abuse of 
discretion on the part of the Superior Court in denying his petition for a writ 
of habeas corpus.  The Superior Court was within its discretion not to treat 
Webb’s petition as a Rule 61 postconviction motion.  Moreover, there was 
no reason for an evidentiary hearing when Webb’s petition was meritless on 
its face.7     
 
 
                                                 
4 Hall v. Carr, 692 A.2d 888, 891 (Del. 1997). 
5 Id. 
6 Id. (quoting Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 6902(1)).  
7 Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, § 8803(b). 
 
4
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice