Laster v. State of Delaware
This text of Laster v. State of Delaware (Laster v. State of Delaware) 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
JERMAINE LASTER, § § Defendant Below, § No. 170, 2022 Appellant, § § Court Below: Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID No. 1307014887 § Appellee. §
Submitted: June 17, 2022 Decided: June 30, 2022
Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and TRAYNOR, Justices.
ORDER
After consideration of the notice to show cause and the responses, it appears
to the Court that:
(1) On May 19, 2022, the appellant, Jermaine Laster, filed a notice of
appeal from a Superior Court order dated March 21, 2022, that denied Laster’s
motion for reargument of the court’s denial of his motion for correction of illegal
sentence. The Superior Court order denying the motion for reargument was dated
and docketed on April 14, 2022. Under Supreme Court Rules 6 and 11, a timely
notice of appeal should have been filed on or before May 16, 2022. (2) A notice of appeal must be timely filed to invoke the Court’s appellate
jurisdiction.1 The jurisdictional defect created by the untimely filing of a notice of
appeal cannot be excused unless the appellant can demonstrate that the delay in filing
is attributable to court-related personnel.2
(3) The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Laster to show cause
why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. In response to the notice
to show cause, Laster states that he timely mailed the notice of appeal, but that the
postal service returned it for insufficient postage. He contends that the prison
mailroom was at fault because the mailroom staff should have weighed the mail and
affixed the required postage and charged the difference to his prison account. In
response, the State explains that, for outgoing mail, prison personnel either weigh
the mail and affix postage and charge the inmate’s account or, when an inmate
affixes his own postage, send out the mail as prepared by the inmate, without affixing
additional postage. The State also submits prison mail records supporting the
inference that Laster affixed his own postage to mail that was addressed to this Court
on May 2, 2022.
(4) Laster’s response to the notice to show cause does not provide a basis
for excusing the untimely filing of the notice of appeal. A notice of appeal must be
1 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989). 2 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
2 received by the Court within the applicable time period to be effective.3
“ Unfortunately for [Laster], prison personnel are not court-related personnel, and
Delaware has not adopted a rule similar to the federal prison mailbox rule, which
deems a notice of appeal filed at the time it is delivered to prison authorities for
mailing.”4 Because the record does not reflect that Laster’s failure to file a timely
notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, the appeal must be
dismissed.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),
that the appeal is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. Justice
3 DEL. SUPR. CT. R. 10(a). 4 Schafferman v. State, 2016 WL 5929953, at *1 (Del. Oct. 11, 2016).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Laster v. State of Delaware, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laster-v-state-of-delaware-del-2022.