State v. Maddrey

CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedJuly 24, 2025
Docket2304008077 2310000567
StatusPublished

This text of State v. Maddrey (State v. Maddrey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Maddrey, (Del. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE, ) ) ) I.D.: 2304008077 v. ) 2310000567 ) RONALD MADDREY ) ) Defendant. )

Submitted: July 2, 2025 Decided: July 24, 2025

ORDER On Defendant’s Motion for Modification/Reduction of Sentence

DENIED

This 24th day of July, 2025, upon consideration of the instant Motion for

Correction of an Illegal Sentence, under Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b)1

brought by Defendant Ronald Maddrey (“Maddrey”), it appears to the Court that:

1. On April 12, 2024, Maddrey pled guilty to Drug Dealing Cocaine and

Resisting Arrest.2 On the same day, Maddrey was sentenced to fifteen (15)

years at Level V, suspended after two (2) years and six (6) months for

decreasing levels of Probation for Drug Dealing Cocaine and to two (2) years

1 There are two ID numbers in this case. Docket Item (“D.I.”) 17 for ID No. 2304008077 and D.I. 19 for ID No. 2310000567 (hereinafter, “D.I. 17/19”). 2 See D.I. 8 for ID No. 2304008077 and D.I. 11 for ID No. 2310000567. at Level V, followed by one (1) year at Level III for his Resisting Arrest

charge.3

2. In the instant Motion, Maddrey moves this Court for a review of his sentence

under Rule 35(b) which allows the Court to “reduce a sentence of

imprisonment on a motion made within 90 days after the sentence is

imposed.”4 The Court will only consider a request made after 90 days in

extraordinary circumstances.5 The Court will not consider repetitive requests

for sentence reductions.6 The Court has “broad discretion” to determine

whether a reduction of sentence is appropriate.7

3. In the instant Motion, Maddrey asks the Court to suspend the remainder of his

Level V sentence for a period of probation.8 Maddrey has filed two prior

Motions to Modify Sentence based on similar arguments to the instant

Motion.9 The prior Motions were denied by this Court.10 The instant Motion

was filed more than 90 days since the imposition of Maddrey’s sentence on

April 12, 2024.11 The Court finds that Defendant’s request is barred as

3 D.I. 10 for ID No. 2304008077 and D.I. 13 for ID No.2310000567 (hereinafter, “D.I. 10/13). 4 Del. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(b). 5 Id. 6 Id. 7 Hewlett v. State, 2014 WL 5020251, at *1 (Del. 2014). 8 D.I. 17/19. 9 Maddrey’s first Motion to Modify Sentence was timely filed on July 11, 2024. See D.I. 11 for ID No. 2304008077, D.I. 14 for ID No. 2310000567. His second Motion to Modify Sentence was filed on December 28, 2024. See D.I. 14 for ID No. 2304008077, D.I. 16 for ID No. 2310000567. 10 Maddrey’s first Motion was denied by Order dated July 18, 2024. See D.I. 13 for ID No. 2310000567, D.I. 15 for ID No. 2310000567. His second Motion was denied by order dated January 14, 2025. See D.I. 15 for ID No. 2304008077, D.I. 17 for ID No. 2310000567. 11 See D.I. 17/19; D.I. 10/13. repetitive. Even if not repetitive, the Court does not find that there are

extraordinary circumstances warranting consideration of the request.

4. Because the instant Motion is untimely, repetitive and without merit, the Court

DENIES Maddrey’s request for a sentence modification.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Francis J. Jones, Jr. Francis J. Jones, Jr., Judge

cc: Original to the Prothonotary Timothy Maguire, Deputy Attorney General Ronald Maddrey, JTVCC, SBI No. 00586699

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State v. Maddrey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-maddrey-delsuperct-2025.