Court Opinion

ID: 9916796
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-10 18:03:29.08917+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:26:04.479696
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE,                               )
                                                 )
       v.                                        )          ID No.          2101000281
                                                 )
BYRON STAFFORD,                                  )
                                                 )
       Defendant.                                )

                                            ORDER

       1. On this 9th day of January, 2024, upon consideration of Defendant Byron

Stafford’s (“Defendant”) pro se Motion for Sentence Modification (the “Motion”)

made pursuant to Superior Court Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b),1 the sentence

imposed upon Defendant, and the record in this case, it appears to the Court that:

       2. On March 16, 2022, Defendant pled guilty to Robbery in the Second

Degree and Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony

(“PFDCF”).2

       3. On March 30, 2022, this Court sentenced him to (1) Robbery, five years of

Level V supervision, followed by six months of Level IV supervision, followed by

one year of Level III supervision and (2) PFDCF, three years of Level V

supervision.3

       4. On October 5, 2023, Defendant filed the instant Motion, in which he asks

the Court to modify the Level IV supervision portion of his sentence to Level IV

1
  D.I. 23. Defendant does not specifically cite to Rule 35(b) in the Motion, but he asks this Court
to modify the conditions of his probation.
2
  D.I. 17.
3
  D.I. 18.
(Home Confinement). In support, he states that his mother is willing to host him for

this period and that he has secured employment.4

       5. Rule 35(b) authorizes this Court to “reduce the . . . conditions of partial

confinement or probation, at any time.” A motion to modify the terms of partial

confinement or probation is not subject to the ninety-day limitation that applies to a

motion for sentence reduction.5

       6. After reviewing the Motion, sentence, and record in this case, the Court

finds no just cause for sentence modification.6 Defendant’s sentence is appropriate

for all the reasons stated at the time of sentencing. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion

is DENIED.

       IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                    ______________________________
                                                        Sheldon K. Rennie, Judge

Original to Prothonotary

cc:    Byron Stafford (SBI #00802990)

4
  D.I. 23.
5
  State v. Harmon, 2023 WL 7599111, at *1 (Del. Super. Nov. 14, 2023) (quoting State v. Baily,
2017 WL 8787504, at *1 (Del. Super. Oct. 3, 2017)).
6
  Where this Court has considered similar motions to modify the Level IV portion of a sentence to
remove the discretion of the Delaware Department of Correction, it has tended to deny them. See
State v. Snead, 2023 WL 2987103, at *1 (Del. Super. Apr. 12, 2023); State v. Starkey, 2020 WL
2789704, at *2 (Del. Super. May 29, 2020); State v. Charles, 2020 WL 2026833, at *2 (Del. Super.
Apr. 21, 2020); State v. Joseph, 2018 WL 1895697, at *1 (Del. Super. Apr. 11, 2018); State v.
Kilson, 2016 WL 1590965, at *1 (Del. Super. Apr. 14, 2016).
                                               2