Philipot v. State
This text of Philipot v. State (Philipot 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
MATTHEW M. PHLIPOT, § § Defendant Below, § No. 187, 2018 Appellant, § § Court Below—Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § ID. No. 0903021873 (S) § Plaintiff Below, § Appellee. §
Submitted: April 26, 2018 Decided: June 14, 2018
Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices.
ORDER
This 14th day of June 2018, after careful consideration of the appellant’s
opening brief, the appellee’s motion to affirm, and the record below, we conclude
that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court’s
March 29, 2018 order denying the appellant’s third motion for postconviction relief.1
The Superior Court did not err in concluding that the motion was procedurally barred
by Superior Court Criminal Rule 61 and that the appellant had failed to overcome
the procedural hurdles.
1 State v. Phlipot, 2018 WL 1581195 (Del. Mar. 29, 2018). NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that motion to affirm is GRANTED
and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. Justice
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Philipot v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philipot-v-state-del-2018.