Title: Wiseman v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 15, 2007
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: July 20, 2007

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JONATHAN W. WISEMAN,  
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
No. 15, 2007 
 
Defendant Below,  
 
§ 
 
Appellant,  
 
 
§ 
Court Below—Superior Court 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
of the State of Delaware in and 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
for New Castle County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
§ 
Def. ID Nos. 0601015508 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 0603024038 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 0604003636 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 0604009844 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: April 13, 2007 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
July  20, 2007 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 20th day of July 2007, upon consideration of the parties’ briefs 
and the Superior Court record, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
In 2006, the appellant, Jonathan Wiseman, was arrested several 
times for his alleged involvement in a number of crimes.  Wiseman’s arrests 
led to four separate grand jury indictments followed by four separate plea 
agreements.  In the end, Wiseman pleaded guilty to a total of six offenses, 
i.e., second degree burglary, harassment, terroristic threatening, forgery, 
 
2
theft, and delivery of a schedule II controlled substance.1  He was sentenced 
in the aggregate for those offenses on September 22, 2006.2  The Superior 
Court made the sentence effective June 24, 2006 and provided that Wiseman 
would receive fifty-nine days of credit for time that he spent in custody in 
default of bail.3 
 
(2) 
On November 21, 2006, Wiseman filed a motion for 
modification of sentence.  By order dated December 18, 2006, the Superior 
Court denied Wiseman’s motion.  This appeal followed. 
 
(3) 
According to Wiseman, the fifty-nine days that he spent in 
custody in default of bail were related to his arrest for burglary.  Therefore, 
Wiseman argues, the Superior Court erred when it did not apply the fifty-
nine days of credit for time served to the incarceration that was imposed for 
the burglary conviction.4     
                                                 
1 State v. Wiseman, Del. Super. Ct., Cr. ID No. 0601015508, Del Pesco, J. (July 5, 2006) 
(guilty plea to charges of harassment and terroristic threatening); State v. Wiseman, Del. 
Super. Ct., Cr. ID No. 0603024038, Del. Pesco, J. (July 5, 2006) (guilty plea to forgery 
and theft; State v. Wiseman, Del. Super. Ct., Cr. ID No. 0604003636, Del Pesco, J. (July 
5, 2006) (guilty plea to second degree burglary); State v. Wiseman, Del. Super. Ct., Cr. 
ID No. 0604009844, Del Pesco, J. (Aug. 7, 2006) (guilty plea to delivery of a schedule II 
controlled substance). 
2 State v. Wiseman, Del. Super. Ct., Cr. ID Nos. 0604003636, 0604009844, 0601015508, 
0603024038, Cooch, J. (Sept. 22, 2006) (sentence).  
3 Wiseman was sentenced to a total of four years at Level V incarceration, including one 
year minimum mandatory, suspended after successful completion of the Level V Key 
Program, for decreasing levels of supervision. 
 
4 For second degree burglary, Wiseman was sentenced to two years at Level V 
incarceration suspended after one year minimum mandatory for one year at Level III 
probation.   
 
3
 
(4) 
Wiseman’s appeal is without merit.  There is nothing in the 
record suggesting that the Superior Court credited Wiseman for time served 
in a manner other than what is prescribed by statute.5  Moreover, Wiseman 
has not demonstrated that he was prejudiced as a result of the Superior 
Court’s alleged misallocation of the credit for time served.  
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs  
                        
 
 
                                                          Justice 
                                                 
5 See Del. Code Ann. tit., 11 § 3901 (2001) (governing credit for time spent in custody).