Title: Bradley v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 389, 2011
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: October 27, 2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
RAYMOND E. BRADLEY, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 389, 2011 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Sussex County 
§  Cr. ID 92S05720DI 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: October 24, 2011 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: October 27, 2011 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER, and JACOBS, Justices 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 27th day of October 2011, after careful consideration of the 
parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, we find it manifest that the 
judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court=s 
well-reasoned decision dated July 6, 2010. The Superior Court did not err in 
concluding that appellant’s third motion for postconviction relief was both 
untimely and repetitive.  Appellant had failed to overcome these procedural 
hurdles because, contrary to appellant’s argument, this Court’s decision in 
Blake v. State1 did not create a newly recognized right. 
                                                 
1 Blake v. State,  3 A.3d 1077 (Del. 2011). 
 
2
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Carolyn Berger 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice