King v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

King v. State

192 A.3d 555

Supreme Court of Delaware·Decided August 6, 2018·No. 338, 2018·Published

Opinion

Leo E. Strine, Jr., Chief Justice

After careful consideration of the appellant's opening brief, the appellee's motion to affirm, and the record, we conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court order, dated June 11, 2018, denying the appellant's motion for a progress report. The Superior Court was not required to issue a progress report on the appellant's service of his twenty-four-year, non-suspended Level V sentence.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Affirm is GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

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

Leo E. Strine, Jr., Chief Justice

After careful consideration of the appellant's opening brief, the appellee's motion to affirm, and the record, we conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court order, dated June 11, 2018, denying the appellant's motion for a progress report. The Superior Court was not required to issue a progress report on the appellant's service of his twenty-four-year, non-suspended Level V sentence.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Affirm is GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

King v. State, 192 A.3d 555 (Del. 2018).

Pincite

192 A.3d 555 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.