Title: Layton v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 451, 2005
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: April 24, 2006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
ROBERT WAYNE LAYTON, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 451, 2005 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Kent County 
§  Cr. ID 0211004521 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: February 17, 2006 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: April 24, 2006 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and JACOBS, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 24th day of April 2006, upon consideration of the parties’ briefs 
and the record below, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
The appellant, Robert Wayne Layton, filed this appeal from an 
order of the Superior Court denying his motion for modification of sentence 
as untimely. Layton argues that the Superior Court erred in finding his 
motion time-barred because the original sentencing order expressly provided 
that, upon his successful completion of the Key Program, Layton could 
request Superior Court to review his sentence.  Layton contends that he has 
successfully completed the Key Program; therefore, the Superior Court is 
obligated to review the merits of sentence modification request. 
 
2
(2) 
The State concedes that the Superior Court abused its discretion 
in finding Layton’s motion to be procedurally barred by the 90 limitation 
period of Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b).  The State requests that this 
matter be remanded to the Superior Court with instructions to consider the 
merits of Layton’s sentence modification motion.  Given the Superior 
Court’s explicit retention of jurisdiction over Layton’s sentence, we agree 
that it was an abuse of discretion for the Superior Court not to consider the 
merits of Layton’s first motion for a sentence modification.   
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Superior Court’s 
order, dated August 29, 2005, is hereby VACATED.  This matter is 
REMANDED to the Superior Court for further consideration of Layton’s 
motion for sentence modification consistent with this order.  Jurisdiction is 
not retained. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice