Title: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 215, 2018
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: May 11, 2018

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JOSHUA D. BENSON, 
 
Defendant Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF DELAWARE, 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
Appellee. 
§ 
§   
§  No. 215, 2018 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  
§  Cr. ID No. 1611007969 (K) 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: May 10, 2018 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
May 11, 2018 
 
Before VALIHURA, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices. 
 
ORDER 
 
This 11th day of May 2018, upon consideration of the notice to show cause 
and the response, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
On April 26, 2018, the appellant, Joshua D. Benson, filed a notice of 
appeal from an April 19, 2018 Superior Court order denying his motion for 
appointment of counsel.  Benson filed the motion in connection with his first motion 
for postconviction relief under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61.  Benson had pled 
guilty to Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited and Resisting Arrest on 
August 1, 2017.  The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Benson to show 
cause why his appeal should not be dismissed based on this Court’s lack of 
2 
 
jurisdiction under Article IV, § 11(1)(b) of the Delaware Constitution to hear an 
interlocutory appeal in a criminal case.   
(2) 
In his response to the notice to show cause, Benson argues that the 
Superior Court order denying his motion for appointment of counsel should be 
treated as final.  Under the Delaware Constitution, this Court may review only a final 
judgment in a criminal case.1 The Superior Court’s denial of Benson’s motion for 
appointment of counsel is an interlocutory, not final, order.2  This Court does not 
have jurisdiction to review this appeal.3   
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), 
that this appeal is DISMISSED.   
BY THE COURT: 
/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 
Justice 
 
                                                 
1 Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b). 
2 See, e.g., Harris v. State, 2013 WL 4858990, at *1 (Del. Sept. 10, 2013) (holding Superior Court 
order denying motion for appointment of counsel is an interlocutory order). 
3 Gottlieb v. State, 697 A.2d 400, 401 (Del. 1997) (holding Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to 
review interlocutory order in criminal case).