Banks v. State

• Court: Supreme Court of Delaware
• Decided: February 24, 2025
• Docket: 189, 2024
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DEMETRIUS BANKS, § § No. 189, 2024 Defendant Below, § Appellant, § Court Below–Superior Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § Cr. ID Nos. 2205001345 (N) STATE OF DELAWARE, § 2305009558 (N) § Appellee. §

Submitted: December 20, 2024 Decided: February 24, 2025

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

ORDER

After consideration of the parties’ briefs and the Superior Court record, it

appears to the Court that:

(1) Demetrius Banks appeals the Superior Court’s order sentencing him for

a violation of probation (“VOP”). After careful review, we affirm the Superior

Court’s finding that Banks violated the terms of his probation. Because it appears

that Banks’ VOP sentence exceeds the Level V time remaining on his original

sentence, however, we remand to the Superior Court for correction of the sentencing

order.

(2) On February 27, 2023, Banks resolved two sets of pending criminal

charges by pleading guilty to one count of second-degree robbery in Criminal Case Number 2205001345 and one count of second-degree conspiracy and one count of

shoplifting in Criminal Case Number 2206000223. The Superior Court immediately

sentenced Banks as follows: for second-degree robbery, to five years of incarceration

with credit for time served, suspended for one year of Level III probation; for

second-degree conspiracy, to two years of incarceration, suspended for one year of

Level III probation; and for shoplifting, to two years of incarceration, suspended for

one year of Level III probation. Banks did not appeal his convictions or sentence.

(3) On August 10, 2023, the Superior Court found that Banks had violated

the terms of his probation in both cases and resentenced him as follows: for second-

degree robbery, to four years of incarceration, suspended after 80 days followed by

decreasing levels of supervision; for second-degree conspiracy, to two years of

incarceration, suspended for one year of Level III probation with GPS-monitoring;

and for shoplifting, to two years of incarceration, suspended for one year of Level

III probation with GPS-monitoring. On December 6, 2023, the Superior Court again

found Banks in violation of the terms of his probation in both cases and resentenced

him for second-degree robbery in Criminal Case Number 2205001345 to seven years

of incarceration, suspended after thirty days for twelve months of Level III

probation. The Superior Court discharged Banks from probation in Criminal Case

Number 2206000223.

2 (4) On August 10, 2023, Banks pleaded guilty to one count of theft

(organized retail crime) in Criminal Case Number 2305009558. The Superior Court

immediately sentenced Banks to one year of incarceration, suspended for one year

of Level III probation with GPS-monitoring.

(5) On March 27, 2024, Banks’ probation officer filed an administrative

warrant, followed by a supplemental VOP report, alleging that Banks had violated

the terms of his probation in Criminal Case Number 2205001345 and Criminal Case

Number 2305009558 because he: (i) had tested positive for controlled substances,

(ii) failed to comply with special conditions of his probation by failing to follow

substance abuse treatment recommendations, and (iii) failed to abide by the curfew

set by his probation officer on twenty-nine occasions.

(6) At the April 11, 2024 VOP hearing, Banks, with the assistance of

counsel, admitted to violating the terms of his probation “in part” but disputed that

he violated the terms of his probation by testing positive for illegal substances.1 The

Superior Court accepted Banks’ admission that he had violated the terms of his

probation and resentenced him as follows: for second-degree robbery, to six years,

eleven months, and twenty-four days of incarceration, suspended after the successful

completion of a Level V inpatient treatment program followed by decreasing levels

of supervision in Criminal Case Number 2205001345; and for theft, to thirty days

1 App. to Answering Br. at B47. 3 of incarceration with no probation to follow in Criminal Case Number 2305009558.

This appeal followed.

(7) In his opening brief on appeal, Banks argues that the Superior Court

abused its discretion when it revoked his probation because he was violated for

consuming “correctly prescribed medically necessary medication.”2 Banks’

argument is unavailing.

(8) Probation is an “act of grace,” and the Superior Court has broad

discretion when deciding whether to revoke a defendant’s probation.3 The Superior

Court need only be reasonably satisfied that “the conduct of the probationer has not

been as good as required by the conditions of probation.”4 Once the Superior Court

has determined that a probationer has violated the terms of his probation, it may

impose any period of incarceration up to and including the balance of Level V time

remaining on the original sentence.5

(9) Here, Banks admitted that he violated the terms of his probation “in

part” and described for the court the difficulty that he initially had complying with

his curfew.6 Banks’ admission was sufficient to justify the Superior Court’s

2 Opening Br. at 5. 3 Kurzmann v. State, 903 A.2d 702, 716 (Del. 2006). 4 Id. (citation omitted). 5 11 Del. C. § 4334(c); Pavulak v. State, 880 A.2d 1044, 1046 (Del. 2005). 6 App. to Answering Br. at B53 (“When I first came home, my first PO, I wasn’t stable. I was looking for a house. So, every time, I just leave an address. But when she got on me, I started coming in on my curfews. I started doing them.”). 4 revocation of his probation. That is, the Superior Court did not need to make any

finding regarding Banks’ probation officer’s claim that Banks had violated the terms

of his probation by consuming illegal substances. Turning to Banks’ VOP sentence,

it appears to the Court that Banks’ six-year-eleven-months-and-twenty-four-day

VOP sentence exceeds the five-year sentence that the Superior Court originally

imposed for second-degree robbery on February 27, 2023 in Criminal Case Number

2205001345. This matter must therefore be remanded to the Superior Court for the

issuance of a sentencing order that corrects the amount of Level V time remaining

on Banks’ sentence.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the

Superior Court is AFFIRMED. The matter is hereby REMANDED to the Superior

Court with directions to enter a modified sentencing order in accordance with this

Order. Jurisdiction is not retained.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Chief Justice