Title: Iacone v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 399, 2011
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: November 7, 2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
KENNETH IACONE,  
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE,  
 
           Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 399, 2011 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  Cr. ID No. 1009018700 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
                                         Submitted: October 28, 2011 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: November 7, 2011 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER and JACOBS, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 7th day of November 2011, upon consideration of the briefs on 
appeal and the record below, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The defendant-appellant, Kenneth Iacone, filed an appeal from 
the Superior Court’s July 5, 2011 order denying his second motion for 
sentence modification.  We find no merit to the appeal.  Accordingly, we 
affirm.  However, we also remand this matter to the Superior Court for 
further consideration of Iacone’s April 15, 2011 sentencing order. 
 
(2) 
The record reflects that, in January 2011, Iacone pleaded guilty 
to Possession With Intent to Deliver Oxycodone.  On April 15, 2011, he was 
sentenced as a habitual offender to 1 year of Level V incarceration, with 
 
2
credit for 84 days previously served.  In May 2011, the Public Defender filed 
a motion for sentence modification on behalf of Iacone requesting that he be 
given 3 additional days of Level V credit.  The Superior Court denied the 
motion by order dated May 31, 2011, on the ground that there was no 
documentation supporting the claim.  In June 2011, the Public Defender 
filed a second motion on behalf of Iacone, this time requesting that he be 
moved to another correctional facility so his mother could more easily visit 
him.  The Superior Court denied the motion by order dated July 5, 2011, on 
the ground that the placement of inmates is within the discretion of the 
Department of Correction.      
 
(3) 
The Superior Court docket reflects that, on September 9, 2011, 
following the filing of the instant appeal, counsel for the State wrote to the 
sentencing judge and took the position that he had jurisdiction to rule upon 
Iacone’s request for an additional 3 days of Level V credit.  The docket 
further reflects that the judge responded to counsel on September 16, 2011, 
stating that he would not act on the request until this Court had ruled on the 
instant appeal.   
 
(4) 
In this appeal from the Superior Court’s denial of his second 
motion for sentence modification, Iacone’s sole claim is that he is entitled to 
an additional 3 days of Level V credit.  He does not address the basis for the 
 
3
Superior Court’s denial of his second motion for sentence modification.  In 
its answering brief, the State concedes that Iacone is entitled to credit for 
additional time spent at Level V, but takes the position that the issue was not 
timely appealed from the Superior Court’s May 31, 2011 order and may not 
be considered by this Court on appeal from the Superior Court’s July 5, 
2011 order. 
 
(5) 
In the absence of any grounds for reversing the Superior 
Court’s denial of Iacone’s second motion for sentence modification, that 
judgment will be affirmed.  However, in light of the State’s concession that 
Iacone is entitled to credit for additional time spent at Level V, this matter 
will be remanded to the Superior Court for further consideration of that issue 
and for modification of Iacone’s April 15, 2011 sentencing order, should that 
be warranted.   
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED.  The matter is remanded to the Superior 
Court for further proceedings, in accordance with this Order. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Carolyn Berger 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice