German v. State

• Court: Supreme Court of Delaware
• Decided: September 12, 2023
• Docket: 221, 2023
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

WILLIAM GERMAN, § § Defendant Below, § No. 221, 2023 Appellant, § § Court Below: Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID No. 1706013188(N) § Appellee. §

Submitted: September 6, 2023 Decided: September 12, 2023

ORDER

(1) On June 20, 2023, the appellant filed a document indicating that he

wanted to appeal, which the Clerk’s office deemed to be a notice of appeal from a

Superior Court violation of probation sentence order dated June 1, 2023. The

Clerk’s office sent the appellant correspondence on several occasions directing him

to complete and sign an official Form A notice of appeal and to pay the filing fee or

to file a motion and affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis; the postal service

returned the correspondence as undeliverable and unable to be forwarded.

(2) On August 15, 2023, the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice, by

certified mail, directing the appellant to show cause why the Court should not

dismiss the appeal for the appellant’s failure to diligently prosecute the appeal by

either paying the Supreme Court filing fee or filing a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The notice to show cause directed the appellant to respond within ten days

and advised that if the appellant did not respond, dismissal of the appeal would be

deemed to be unopposed. On September 5, 2023, postal records indicated that the

notice to show cause had arrived at the local post office on August 17, 2023, and

was being held for pick up, but the appellant had not retrieved it. The Chief Deputy

Clerk resent the notice to show cause by first-class mail. The postal service returned

the reissued notice to show cause, indicating that delivery had been attempted and

the item could not be forwarded.

(3) The appellant having failed to respond to the notice to show cause

within the required ten-day period, dismissal of this action is deemed to be

unopposed.

(4) NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rules

3(b) and 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

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