Title: Bible v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 716, 2009
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: July 7, 2010

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
DONALD E. BIBLE,  
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 716, 2009 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for Kent County 
§  Cr. ID No. 0501015134 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
Submitted:  May 14, 2010 
Decided:  July 7, 2010 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 7th day of July 2010, upon consideration of the briefs on appeal 
and the record below, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The defendant-appellant, Donald E. Bible, filed an appeal from 
the Superior Court’s October 8, 2009 order, which adopted the August 5, 
2009 report of the Superior Court Commissioner recommending that Bible’s 
postconviction motion be denied.1  We find no merit to the appeal.  
Accordingly, we affirm. 
 
(2) 
The record reflects that, in March 2005, the grand jury indicted 
Bible on 111 criminal offenses, including over 20 counts of Rape in the First 
                                                 
1 Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, §512(b); Super. Ct. Crim. R. 62. 
 
2 
Degree.  The charges stemmed from sexual assaults on twin girls over a 10-
year period, beginning when they were less than 5 years old.  In February 
2006, the State offered Bible a plea to 2 counts of Rape in the First Degree 
with a presentence investigation to be conducted.  After further discussions 
between the prosecutor and defense counsel, the State revised its plea offer 
to 1 count of Rape in the First Degree, 1 count of Rape in the Third Degree 
as a lesser-included offense, and 1 count of Continuous Sexual Abuse of a 
Child.  As part of the revised plea offer, the State agreed to drop the 
remaining criminal charges, refrain from requesting a presentence 
investigation, and recommend a total Level V sentence of 36 years, 
including 19 years of minimum mandatory time.   
 
(3) 
On October 2, 2006, with the assistance of counsel, Bible 
accepted the State’s revised plea offer and pleaded guilty to the 3 charges.  
The Superior Court followed the State’s recommendation on sentencing.  
Bible did not file a direct appeal from his convictions.  He did file 2 motions 
for sentence modification and a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, all of 
which were denied.  This is Bible’s appeal from the Superior Court’s denial 
of his second motion for postconviction relief.2 
                                                 
2 Bible’s first postconviction motion was rejected by the Superior Court because it was 
not in proper form. 
 
3 
 
(4) 
In his second motion for postconviction relief filed in the 
Superior Court, Bible asserted three claims:  a) his trial counsel suppressed 
evidence favorable to him; b) his trial counsel provided ineffective 
assistance; and c) his trial counsel changed the plea agreement without his 
knowledge.  In his appeal from the Superior Court’s denial of his motion, 
Bible asserts only one of his three original claims---that his plea agreement 
was altered without his knowledge.  On that ground, Bible argues that his 
plea was involuntary.3  Bible also claims that the Superior Court’s denial of 
his postconviction claims was erroneous and that the Superior Court abused 
its discretion by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing.   
 
(5) 
Bible’s claim of an involuntary guilty plea is belied by the 
transcript of his guilty plea hearing.  The transcript reflects that Bible stated 
he understood the charges to which he was pleading guilty, he was aware of 
the possible sentences, he was aware that the Superior Court was not bound 
by the recommendation of the State, he understood the guilty plea form and 
plea agreement, he had discussed the plea and its consequences with his 
counsel, he was satisfied with his counsel’s representation, and his plea was 
entered voluntarily.  Moreover, Bible apologized to his victims for his 
actions.  In the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, 
                                                 
3 As such, Bible’s other two claims are deemed to be waived.  Murphy v. State, 632 A.2d 
1150, 1152 (Del. 1993). 
 
4 
Bible is bound by the sworn statements he made to the Superior Court judge 
during his guilty plea colloquy.4  Bible’s suggestion that he was unaware of 
the revisions to his original plea agreement is belied by the transcript of the 
plea hearing as well as the guilty plea form and the plea agreement.   
 
(6) 
Bible’s additional claims that the Superior Court’s denial of his 
postconviction motion was erroneous and that the Superior Court abused its 
discretion by failing to schedule an evidentiary hearing also are without 
merit.  Bible’s motion was properly denied by the Superior Court both on 
procedural and substantive grounds and, moreover, was properly denied 
solely on the submissions of the parties, with no need for an evidentiary 
hearing.5    
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice 
 
                                                 
4 Somerville v. State, 703 A.2d 629, 632 (Del. 1997). 
5 Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(h)(3).