Title: Wilson v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 472, 2023
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: April 8, 2024

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
WARREN D. WILSON, 
 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 472, 2023 
§ 
§  Court Below–Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§   
§  Cr. ID No. 2104016453 (K) 
§   
§   
§                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: February 23, 2024 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
April 8, 2024 
 
Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and GRIFFITHS, Justices. 
 
ORDER 
After 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, Warren D. Wilson, filed this appeal from the Superior 
Court’s November 27, 2023 order denying his motion for correction of an illegal 
sentence.  The State has moved to affirm the conviction below but laudably concedes 
that the Level V portion of Wilson’s sentence for resisting arrest exceeds the 
statutory maximum penalty.  We agree and, accordingly, decline Wilson’s invitation 
to vacate his conviction for resisting arrest but remand the matter to the Superior 
Court to issue a modified sentencing order. 
2 
 
(2) 
On March 30, 2022, Wilson pleaded guilty to one count of felony 
resisting arrest, a class G felony, and one count of driving under the influence of 
drugs.  The Superior Court immediately sentenced Wilson as follows: for resisting 
arrest, to three years of incarceration, suspended for one year of Level II probation; 
and for driving under the influence, to one year of incarceration, suspended for one 
year of Level II probation.  Wilson did not appeal his convictions or sentence. 
(3) 
On May 27, 2022, the Superior Court found that Wilson had violated 
the terms of his probation and sentenced him as follows: for resisting arrest, to three 
years of incarceration, suspended after one year and the successful completion of a 
Level V treatment program followed by decreasing levels of supervision; and for 
driving under the influence, to one year of incarceration, suspended after one year 
of Level III probation.1  Wilson did not appeal. 
(4) 
Between August 2022 and September 2023, Wilson filed four motions 
for sentence modification or review, all of which were denied.  In September 2023, 
Wilson filed a motion for correction of illegal sentence under Superior Court 
Criminal Rule 35(a), arguing that the Level V portion of his sentence for resisting 
arrest exceeds the statutory maximum term of two years.  The Superior Court denied 
the motion as an impermissible repetitive motion for sentence modification.  Wilson 
did not appeal. 
 
1 The Superior Court also discharged Wilson from probation as unimproved in an unrelated case. 
3 
 
(5) 
On November 27, 2023, Wilson filed another motion for correction of 
illegal sentence, again arguing that the Level V portion of his sentence for resisting 
arrest exceeds the statutory maximum term of two years.  The Superior Court denied 
the motion, finding that (i) it was an impermissible repetitive request for sentence 
modification, (ii) Wilson was not amenable to probation at this time, and (iii) the 
sentence remains appropriate for the reasons stated at sentencing.  This appeal 
followed. 
(6) 
In his opening brief on appeal, Wilson argues, as he did below, that his 
sentence for resisting arrest exceeds the statutory maximum penalty of two years for 
a class G felony,2 and that his conviction must therefore be vacated. 
(7) 
We review the denial of a motion for correction of illegal sentence for 
abuse of discretion.3  To the extent a claim involves a question of law, we review the 
claim de novo.4  A sentence is illegal if it exceeds statutory limits, violates the 
Double Jeopardy Clause, 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.5 
 
2 See 11 Del. C. § 1257(a) (“Resisting arrest with force or violence is a class G felony.”); id. § 
4205(b)(7) (limiting the term of incarceration for a class G felony to two years). 
3 Fountain v. State, 2014 WL 4102069, at *1 (Del. Aug. 19, 2014). 
4 Id. 
5 Brittingham v. State, 705 A.2d 577, 578 (Del. 1998). 
4 
 
(8) 
As the State concedes, Wilson’s sentence for resisting arrest exceeds 
statutory limits and must be corrected.  However, Wilson’s argument that his 
conviction must be vacated is without merit.  A Rule 35(a) motion presupposes the 
existence of a valid conviction and is not a means to mount a collateral attack on the 
underlying conviction.6  Accordingly, the appropriate remedy is to remand this 
matter to the Superior Court for the issuance of a new sentencing order that reduces 
the Level V portion of Wilson’s sentence for resisting arrest sentence to two years. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the matter is hereby 
REMANDED to the Superior Court with directions to enter a modified sentencing 
order in accordance with this Order.  Jurisdiction is not retained. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 
                           Chief Justice  
 
6 Id.