Opinion ID: 2361050
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: Unlike the Grossberg appeal, which is an attempted interlocutory appeal in a criminal case over which we clearly have no jurisdiction, this appeal presents an unusual set of legal issues. Yet we have concluded that the outcome of the purported Gottlieb interlocutory appeal must, in the end, be controlled by the same standards that govern the Grossberg appeal. This is a court of limited jurisdiction under the Delaware constitution. That jurisdiction is set forth in Article IV. We have jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals in civil cases from the Superior Court as well as from the Court of Chancery. [8] We also have jurisdiction to receive appeals from the Superior Court in criminal causes, upon application of the accused where the sentence exceeds certain thresholds. [9] Under a new constitutional change just adopted at the end of the most recent session of the General Assembly, there is also a right of appeal by the State of certain previously nonappealable orders in criminal cases ( e.g., new trial, judgment of acquittal after verdict, etc.). [10] This Court also has additional specified jurisdiction under the Delaware Constitution, including the right to hear and issue petitions for extraordinary writs such as mandamus and prohibition. [11] But no such application is before us. We do not have jurisdiction  even permissive jurisdiction as we do in civil cases [12]  to entertain any interlocutory appeal in a criminal case. [13]