Title: Bass v. State
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 585, 2001
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: December 12, 2001

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
DONALD BASS,
Defendant Below,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF DELAWARE,
Plaintiff Below,
Appellee.
      No. 585, 2001
      Court Below:  Superior Court  
     of the State of Delaware in and
     for New Castle County
      Cr. ID No. 9607012102
Submitted:  November 30, 2001
Decided:
 December 12, 2001
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and STEELE, Justices.
O R D E R
This twelfth day of December 2001, upon consideration of the notice
of appeal filed by Donald Bass, the notice to show cause issued by the Clerk,
and the response by Mr. Bass to the notice to show cause, it appears to the
Court that:
 (1)  On November 21, 2001, the Court received Mr. Bass’ notice of
appeal from a Superior Court Order dated October 17, 2001.  A timely notice
of appeal from an Order dated October 17, 2001, should have been filed on
or before November 16, 2001.
2
(2)  On November 21, 2001, the Clerk issued a notice, pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule 29(b), directing Mr. Bass to show cause why the appeal
should not be dismissed for failure to file a timely notice of appeal. Mr. Bass
filed a response to the notice to show cause on November 30, 2001. In his
response, Mr. Bass contends that, because he did not have access to a law
library on a daily basis, he did not understand that he had only 30 days in
which to file an appeal and that he was unable to file his appeal on time
because, on November 15, 2001, his pen ran out of ink.
(3)  Time is a jurisdictional requirement.1  A notice of appeal must be
received by the Office of the Clerk of this Court within the applicable time
period in order to be effective.2  An appellant's pro se status does not excuse
a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional requirements.3  Unless an
appellant can demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is
attributable to court-related personnel, his appeal cannot be considered.4    
                                                 
1 Carr v. State, Del. Supr., 554 A.2d 778, 779, cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).
2 Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).
3 Supr. Ct. R. 6; Carr v. State, 554 A.2d at 779.
4 Bey v. State, Del. Supr., 402 A.2d 362, 363 (1979).
3
(5)  There is nothing in the record that reflects that Mr. Bass’ failure
to file a timely notice of appeal in this case is attributable to court-related
personnel.  Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception to the
general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal.  Thus, the
Court concludes that the within appeal must be dismissed.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court
Rule 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Randy J. Holland
Justice