Title: Bruton v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 100, 2006
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: April 24, 2006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
RAYMOND L. BRUTON, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 100, 2006 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID No. 81000348DI 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: March 6, 2006 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: April 24, 2006 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 24th day of April 2006, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
On February 23, 2006, the Court received the appellant’s notice 
of appeal from the Superior Court’s January 26, 2006 order.  The order 
denied the appellant’s motion for a copy of the presentence report relied 
upon by the Superior Court at his September 1981 sentencing. 
 
(2) 
On February 23, 2006, the Clerk issued a notice pursuant to 
Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing the appellant to show cause why the 
appeal should not be dismissed based on the Court’s lack of jurisdiction to 
entertain a criminal interlocutory appeal.  On March 6, 2006, the appellant 
filed his response to the notice to show cause stating that he does not believe 
 
2
his appeal is interlocutory and that, therefore, the Court has jurisdiction to 
entertain his appeal. 
 
(3) 
The Superior Court’s order denying the appellant’s request for a 
copy of the presentence report is an interlocutory ruling in a criminal 
matter.1  Under the Delaware Constitution, this Court may review only a 
final judgment in a criminal case.2  Accordingly, this Court does not have 
jurisdiction to review the Superior Court’s order in this case.3   
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Supreme 
Court Rule 29(b), the within appeal is DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice 
 
 
 
                                                 
1 Robinson v. State, 704 A.2d 269, 271 (Del. 1998).   
2 Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b). 
3 Gottlieb v. State, 697 A.2d 400 (Del. 1997); Rash v. State, 318 A.2d 603 (Del. 1974).  
Moreover, in the absence of a showing of plain error, the appellant has waived his right to 
request a copy of the presentence report approximately 25 years after the imposition of 
his sentence.  Eaddy v. State, Del. Supr., No. 440, 1995, Walsh, J. 1996 WL 313499 
(May 30, 1996).