Title: Wannamaker v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 104, 2022
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: August 8, 2022

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
NAIROBI WANNAMAKER, 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Appellee. 
§ 
§   
§     No. 104, 2022 
§ 
§     Court Below—Superior Court 
§     of the State of Delaware 
§   
§    Cr. ID No. 2008006841 (K) 
§  
§  
 
Submitted: June 15, 2022 
 Decided:  August 8, 2022 
 
 
ORDER 
 
Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and TRAYNOR, Justices. 
 
 
Upon consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the appellee’s motion to 
affirm, and the record below, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
The appellant, Nairobi Wannamaker, filed this appeal from a Superior 
Court order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence.  The State of Delaware 
has moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment on the ground that it is manifest 
on the face of Wannamaker’s opening brief that the appeal is without merit.  We 
agree and affirm. 
(2) 
The record reflects that, in November 2020, a grand jury indicted 
Wannamaker for multiple crimes arising from an August 15, 2020 break-in.  On 
October 27, 2021, Wannamaker pleaded guilty to one count of second-degree 
 
2 
burglary and one count of possession of a firearm by a person prohibited (“PFBPP”).  
As part of the plea agreement, the parties recommended the following sentence: (i) 
for second-degree burglary, eight years of Level V incarceration suspended for one 
year of Level III probation; and (ii) for PFBPP, eight years of Level V incarceration 
suspended after the five-year minimum mandatory for one year of Level III 
probation.   The Superior Court imposed the recommended sentence.    
(3) 
Wannamaker did not appeal, but did file a motion for correction of 
illegal sentence.  He argued that the five-year minimum portion of his PFBPP 
sentence was illegal.  The Superior Court denied the motion, finding that the 
sentence was imposed under the parties’ plea agreement and that the five-year 
portion of PFBPP sentence fell within the statutory range.  Wannamaker filed a 
motion for reargument, which the Superior Court denied.  This appeal followed. 
(4) 
This Court reviews the denial of a motion for correction of illegal 
sentence for abuse of discretion.1  We review questions of law de novo.2  A sentence 
is illegal if it exceeds statutory limits, violates double jeopardy, is ambiguous with 
respect to the time and manner in which it is to be served, is internally contradictory, 
omits a term required to be imposed by statute, is uncertain as to its substance, or is 
a sentence that the judgment of conviction did not authorize.3   
 
1 Fountain v. State, 2014 WL 4102069, at *1 (Del. Aug. 19, 2014). 
2 Id. 
3 Brittingham v. State, 705 A.2d 577, 578 (Del. 1998). 
 
3 
(5) 
As he did below, Wannamaker argues in his opening brief that his 
PFBPP sentence is illegal because his PFBPP conviction under 11 Del. C. § 
1448(a)(1) did not authorize a five-year minimum sentence under 11 Del. C. § 
1448(e)(1).  He is mistaken.   
(6) 
At the time of Wannamaker’s crimes in August 2020, a person “ having 
been convicted in this State or elsewhere of a felony or a crime of violence involving 
physical injury to another, whether or not armed with or having in possession any 
weapon during the commission of such felony or crime of violence” was prohibited 
from possessing a deadly weapon.4  A prohibited person who knowingly possessed 
a firearm was subject to a minimum sentence of “[f]ive years at Level V, if the person 
does so within 10 years of the date of conviction for any violent felony or the date 
of termination of all periods of incarceration or confinement imposed pursuant to 
said conviction, whichever is the later date.”5 
(7) 
In the signed plea agreement, Wannamaker agreed to a recommended 
PFBPP sentence of eight years Level V incarceration suspended after the five-year 
minimum mandatory for probation.  A five-year minimum mandatory sentence was 
consistent with the indictment for the PFBPP charge, which reflected that 
Wannamaker had an October 27, 2010 conviction for second-degree burglary in Cr. 
 
4 11 Del. C. § 1448(a)(1) (effective from Dec. 17, 2018 to Oct. 19, 2021). 
5 Id. § 1448(e)(1)(b). 
 
4 
ID No. 1001019866.  Section 4201(c) designates second-degree burglary a violent 
felony.  Based on his commission of PFBPP within ten years of his conviction for 
second-degree burglary, Wannamaker was subject to a five-year minimum sentence 
for PFBPP under Section 1448(e)(1)(b).  The Superior Court did not err in denying 
Wanamaker’s motion for correction of illegal sentence.  
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is 
GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/  James T. Vaughn, Jr. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice