Chavis v. State
This text of Chavis v. State (Chavis v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
DAKAI CHAVIS, § § No. 299, 2019 Defendant Below, § Appellant, § § v. § Court Below–Superior Court § of the State of Delaware STATE OF DELAWARE, § § Cr. ID No. 1806020079 (N) Plaintiff Below, § Appellee. §
Submitted: August 5, 2019 Decided: August 6, 2019
Before VAUGHN, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant’s response,
it appears to the Court that:
(1) On July 12, 2019, counsel for the appellant, Dakai Chavis, filed a notice
of appeal from a Superior Court sentence imposed on June 7, 2019. A timely notice
of appeal should have been filed on or before July 8, 2019.1 The Senior Court Clerk
issued a notice directing Chavis’ counsel to show cause why this appeal should not
be dismissed as untimely filed under Supreme Court Rule 6.
1 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(iii) (providing notice of appeal must be filed “[w]ithin 30 days after a sentence is imposed in a direct appeal of a criminal conviction”). The thirtieth day after Chavis’ sentencing, July 7, 2019, was a Sunday. Chavis’ notice of appeal therefore had to be filed on or before Monday, July 8, 2019. Del. Supr. Ct. R. 11(a). (2) In his response to the notice to show cause, Chavis’ counsel states that
he believed, incorrectly, that his notice of appeal was timely filed because July 12,
2019, fell within 30 business days—as opposed to calendar days—from the date of
Chavis’ sentencing.
(3) The State was asked to respond to the position of Chavis’ counsel. As
the State recognizes, the failure of Chavis’ counsel does not fall within the exception
to the general rule requiring the timely filing of a notice of appeal. The State also
recognizes that this failure, if not remedied, would leave the Court without
jurisdiction to hear Chavis’ direct appeal. Under these circumstances, the State
recommends that the matter be remanded to the Superior Court with direction to
vacate its June 7, 2019 sentence and to resentence Chavis. Taking this course of
action will allow Chavis to pursue a timely direct appeal.
(4) We agree that the proper course of action is to remand this matter to the
Superior Court. Upon remand, the Superior Court shall vacate the June 7, 2019
sentence and resentence Chavis.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the matter is
REMANDED to the Superior Court for further action in accordance with this order.
Jurisdiction is not retained.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Chavis v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chavis-v-state-del-2019.