Donophan v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

Donophan v. State

426 A.2d 841, 1981 Del. LEXIS 283

DecidedFebruary 19, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 426 A.2d 841 (Donophan 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.

Bluebook

Donophan v. State, 426 A.2d 841, 1981 Del. LEXIS 283 (Del. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

DUFFY, Justice:

By order dated December 11, 1980, this case was remanded to the Superior Court so that the Trial Judge might enter upon the record his ruling on the offer in evidence by the State of court records showing that defendant “had been convicted of Burglary in the Second Degree.” Thereafter, the Superior Court filed an opinion stating that

[842]*842“[t]his matter has been remanded to this Court by the Supreme Court for the purpose, as I understand it, of determining what weight was given, at trial, to the offer by the State that the defendant had been previously sentenced for a felony.

I considered this evidence as absolute proof that the defendant had been convicted of a felony since a sentence is the judgment of conviction. 15 Am.Jur., Crim. Law § 443.”

Counsel have had an opportunity to be heard on the supplemental opinion by the Superior Court.

It is clear from the ruling by the Trial Court that it admitted into evidence the court records offered by the State showing that defendant had been convicted of Burglary in the Second Degree. Thus the trial record is complete. Such records show that defendant had been sentenced by the Superior Court for the crime of Burglary in the Second Degree and we conclude that such sentence includes a conviction of that crime within the meaning of 11 Del.C. § 1448. See State v. Superior Court, Del.Supr., 141 A.2d 468 (1958), and Frabizzio v. State, Del.Super., 59 A.2d 452 (1948); compare Lis v. State, Del.Supr., 327 A.2d 746 (1974). It follows, therefore, that defendant’s conviction is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DUFFY, Justice:

By order dated December 11, 1980, this case was remanded to the Superior Court so that the Trial Judge might enter upon the record his ruling on the offer in evidence by the State of court records showing that defendant “had been convicted of Burglary in the Second Degree.” Thereafter, the Superior Court filed an opinion stating that

[842]*842“[t]his matter has been remanded to this Court by the Supreme Court for the purpose, as I understand it, of determining what weight was given, at trial, to the offer by the State that the defendant had been previously sentenced for a felony.

I considered this evidence as absolute proof that the defendant had been convicted of a felony since a sentence is the judgment of conviction. 15 Am.Jur., Crim. Law § 443.”

Counsel have had an opportunity to be heard on the supplemental opinion by the Superior Court.

It is clear from the ruling by the Trial Court that it admitted into evidence the court records offered by the State showing that defendant had been convicted of Burglary in the Second Degree. Thus the trial record is complete. Such records show that defendant had been sentenced by the Superior Court for the crime of Burglary in the Second Degree and we conclude that such sentence includes a conviction of that crime within the meaning of 11 Del.C. § 1448. See State v. Superior Court, Del.Supr., 141 A.2d 468 (1958), and Frabizzio v. State, Del.Super., 59 A.2d 452 (1948); compare Lis v. State, Del.Supr., 327 A.2d 746 (1974). It follows, therefore, that defendant’s conviction is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

426 A.2d 841, 1981 Del. LEXIS 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donophan-v-state-del-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack