Court Opinion

ID: 9392580
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-05 16:04:27.289899+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:46.723028
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

  WILLIAM D. BAKER,                     §
                                        §   No. 477, 2022
        Defendant Below,                §
        Appellant,                      §   Court Below–Superior Court
                                        §   of the State of Delaware
        v.                              §
                                        §   Cr. ID No. 2107008312 (S)
  STATE OF DELAWARE,                    §
                                        §
        Appellee.                       §

                          Submitted: March 8, 2023
                          Decided:   May 4, 2023

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices.

                                      ORDER

      After consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion to

affirm, and the record on appeal, it appears to the Court that:

      (1)    The appellant, William D. Baker, appeals the Superior Court’s order

sentencing him for a violation of probation (“VOP”). The State has filed a motion

to affirm the judgment below on the ground that it is manifest on the face of Baker’s

opening brief that his appeal is without merit. We agree and affirm.

      (2)    On August 8, 2022, Baker pleaded guilty to two counts of misdemeanor

theft and one count of third-degree forgery. In accordance with the plea agreement,

the Superior Court immediately sentenced Baker for each conviction to one year of

incarceration, suspended for one year of Level III probation.
      (3)    On October 5, 2022, Baker’s probation officer filed an administrative

warrant alleging that Baker had violated the terms of his probation because he had

(i) been charged with new felony offenses in Kent County, (ii) failed to report to

probation, (iii) failed to report his change of address, and (iv) not complied with the

special conditions of the court’s sentence. Following a hearing on December 2,

2022, the Superior Court found that Baker had violated the terms of his probation.

The Superior Court re-sentenced Baker as follows: (i) for misdemeanor theft, to one

year of incarceration, suspended after his successful completion of a Level IV

program (to be determined by the Department of Correction) for one year of Level

III probation; (ii) for misdemeanor theft, to seven months of incarceration (taking

into account all time previously served), suspended for one year of Level III

probation; and (iii) for third-degree forgery, to one year of incarceration, suspended

for one year of Level III probation. This appeal followed.

      (4)    In his opening brief on appeal, Baker does not dispute that he violated

the terms of his probation. Instead, Baker argues that the Superior Court “could

have” consolidated his VOP with another he faced in the Court of Common Pleas

because they were based on the same violation—the criminal charges for which he

was arrested in Kent County. Baker also claims that he was not given credit for the

time he served awaiting the disposition of these new criminal charges and that he

has medical needs that cannot be met by the DOC. Baker’s claims are unavailing.

                                          2
      (5)    Although the Superior Court can consolidate VOPs in separate cases

within its jurisdiction, the Superior Court cannot, as Baker contends, exercise

jurisdiction over cases outside of its jurisdiction—including Baker’s VOP in the

Court of Common Pleas. And to the extent that Baker claims he was not given credit

for time served in this case, the record does not support his conclusory claim. As a

final matter, the DOC may apply for the modification of Baker’s sentence under 11

Del. C. § 4217 if it determines that it is unable to meet his medical needs.

      NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to affirm

be GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court be AFFIRMED.

                                 BY THE COURT:

                                 /s/ Gary F. Traynor
                                 Justice

                                          3