State v. Howard

• Court: Superior Court of Delaware
• Decided: September 5, 2025
• Docket: 2410012192
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE, ) ) v. ) ) I.D. # 2410012192 NYMERE HOWARD, ) ) Defendant. )

Submitted: July 25, 2025 Decided: September 5, 2025

ORDER DENYING NYMERE HOWARD’S MOTION FOR CORRECTION OF SENTENCE

The Court having considered Nymere Howard’s (“Howard”) Motion for

Correction of Sentence1 (the “Motion”), for the following reasons, the Motion is

DENIED.

1. In December 2024, Howard was indicted on multiple counts, including

Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited (“PFBPP”), in violation of Section

1448, where it was alleged that on October 23, 2024, he knowingly possessed a

Polymer8 firearm “after having been convicted of Possession of a Firearm During

the Commission of a Felony a felony or crime of violence in Case Number

2202001860, in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle

County on or about April 12, 2023.”

2. If a person prohibited violates Section 1448 within 10 years of a prior

1 D.I. 12. 1 violent felony conviction, the minimum mandatory sentence is 5 years at Level V.

If a person prohibited violates Section 1448 and was previously convicted of 2

violent felonies on separate occasions, the minimum mandatory sentence is 10 years

at Level V.

3. Howard signed the Plea Agreement and the Truth-in Sentencing

(“TIS”) form, acknowledging that he understood the possible sentencing range. The

TIS form reflected that Howard faced a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years

on the PFBPP charge. Per the Plea Agreement, Howard agreed that he had two prior

violent felony convictions: Carrying a Concealed Deadly Weapon (“CCDW”) in

2020 and Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony (“PFDCF”)

in 2023.2 These two convictions were also listed as prior violent felonies in the

Immediate Sentencing Form. The Immediate Sentencing Form listed prior non-

violent felony convictions: PFBPP in 2020 and Possession of a Controlled Substance

in 2021 and 2023.

4. On January 27, 2025, Howard pled guilty to PFBPP and was found in

violation of probation (“VOP”). He was immediately sentenced on the PFBPP

charge to 15 years at Level V, suspended for 10 years at Level V, followed by 18

months at Level III GPS. For the VOP in N22-08-1697, he was sentenced to 22

years at Level V, suspended for six months at Level IV, followed by 18 months at

2 Level III GPS, and in N22-08-1698, he was discharged from probation as

unimproved.3

5. On April 21, 2025, Howard filed a motion for sentence reduction,

which the Court denied.4 Howard filed the Motion on July 25, 2025 arguing that

despite the admission in the Plea Agreement, the 2020 CCDW and 2020 PFBPP

convictions were non-violent felonies, thereby exposing him to a minimum

mandatory sentence of 5 years, not 10 years.5 In support, Howard cites to the

Delaware Sentencing Accountability Commission Benchbook (SENTAC), which he

says classifies CCDW as a non-violent crime.6

6. Under Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(a), the Court “may correct an

illegal sentence at any time.” Rule 35(a) relief is limited to instances

when the sentence imposed exceeds statutorily-authorized limits, [] violates the Double Jeopardy Clause, . . . is ambiguous with respect to the time and manner in which it is to be served, is internally contradictory, omits a term required to be imposed by statute, is uncertain as to its substance, or is a sentence that the judgment of conviction did not authorize.

7. Howard cites Jones v. State7for the proposition that a meaningful

review of a defendant’s criminal history is warranted when subjecting him to

enhanced sentencing. In Jones, the defendant was sentenced to 10 years minimum

3 D.I. 8. 4 D.I. 10. 5 D.I. 12. 6 Id., p. 4. 7 259 A.3d 1272 (TABLE), 2021 WL 4098967 (Del. Sept. 8, 2021). 3 mandatory based on two prior violent felony convictions. However, on appeal the

State conceded at oral argument that one of the convictions was not considered a

violent felony at the time that Jones received his enhanced sentence. The Supreme

Court reversed the denial of Jones’ motion to correct his sentence and remanded the

case for resentencing.

8. Crimes which are classified as a “violent felony” are found in 11 Del.

C. § 4201(c). Whether a crime is a violent felony is controlled by the version of

Section 4201(c) in effect at the time the defendant committed the person prohibited

offense under Section 1448. The 2024 version of Section 4201(c) classifies CCDW

(11 Del. C. § 1442) as a violent felony. Thus, Howard did have two prior qualifying

felonies, subjecting him to the enhanced sentencing of 10 years.

9. Howard is correct that there is a reference in the SENTAC Benchbook

which indicates that CCDW is a “non-violent” crime. However, the Benchbook

must be read in context. CCDW is either a Class D (if the deadly weapon is a

firearm) or Class G, violent felony. The Supplemental Notations for a CCDW Class

G Violent Felony refers to the crime of Possession of a Weapon in a Safe Recreation

Zone. So if a person commits the crime of CCDW in a safe zone, he is also guilty

of the second crime of Possession of a Weapon in a Safe Recreation Zone,8 which

8 11 Del. C. § 1457. 4 becomes “a Class F NonViolent Felony.” Stated differently, if the crime of CCDW

is committed in a Safe School Zone and it otherwise qualifies as a Class G felony,

the crime will be classified one grade higher—Class F—but will become a non-

violent felony.

10. Howard CCDW conviction in 2020, however, was a Class D felony,

thus the section of the Benchbook to which he refers has no application here.

11. Accordingly, the Motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Kathleen M. Miller Kathleen M. Miller, Judge

cc: Prothonotary Nymere Howard (SBI#00781881) Jillian Bender, Esq.