State v. Collins

• Court: Superior Court of Delaware
• Decided: January 29, 2025
• Docket: 2111014293
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) v. ) ID# 2111014293 ) JOHN COLLINS ) )

Date Submitted: January 13, 2025 Date Decided: January 29, 2025

ORDER

On this 29th day of January, 2025, after having considered John

Collins’s pro se “Motion for Sentence Modification/Reduction,” which was

originally stayed during the pendency of Collins’s direct appeal, it appears to

the Court that:

1. Collins was convicted of three counts of Attempted Assault in

the First Degree, one count of Assault Second Degree, five counts of

Possession of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of a Felony, one

count of Receiving Stolen Property Over $1500, one count of Resisting

Arrest with Force or Violence, three counts of Criminal Mischief, one count

of Attempted Theft under $1500 and one count of Criminal Trespass Second

Degree on December 16, 2022. 1

1 D.I. 26. 2. Defendant was sentenced on December 22, 2023. 2 Defendant

then filed a direct appeal of his conviction to the Supreme Court of Delaware

on January 23, 2024.3 During the pendency of his appeal, Collins filed the

instant motion.4

3. Superior Court Criminal Rule 35 governs motions for

modifications of sentence. Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(a) controls

motions to correct an illegal sentence. Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b)

states: “the court may reduce a sentence of imprisonment on a motion made

within 90 days after the sentence is imposed. This period shall not be

interrupted or extended by an appeal, except that a motion may be made

within 90 days of the imposition of sentence after remand for a new trial or

for resentencing. The court may decide the motion or defer decision while an

appeal is pending. Further, the Court may decide the motion without

presentation or formal hearing.” 5

4. This motion was stayed during the pendency of his appeal.6

Collins’s direct appeal was denied by the Supreme Court on January 13,

2025. 7 This matter is now ripe for review.

2 D.I. 29. 3 D.I. 32. 4 D.I. 43. 5 Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(b). 6 D.I. 44. 5. Collins’s motion does not specify under which subsection of

Rule 35 he is moving, but raises three grounds for relief. Each ground raises

an issue of ineffective assistance of counsel.

6. Given that there are no issues raised regarding the legality of his

sentence, that this is Collins’s first motion to modify his sentence, and it was

filed within ninety (90) days of his sentencing, the motion is timely and will

be considered under Rule 35(b). 8

7. Although timely, the motion is still without merit. All three

grounds raised are inappropriate for consideration under Rule 35. The

proper procural vehicle for raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel

is found in Superior Court Criminal Rule 61.9 Given that Collins’s has not

raised any ground for relief proper for review under Superior Court Criminal

Rule 35, the motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_____________________________ Danielle J. Brennan, Judge CC: John Collins (SBI: 00967925) Department of Justice Ben Gifford, Esquire Prothonotary

7 Collins v. State, 2025 WL 79571 (TABLE) (Del. Supr.) 8 Superior Court Criminal R. 35. 9 See Superior Court Criminal Rule 61; see also State v. Braithwaite, 2024 WL 4752080, at *2 (Del. Super.)