State v. Meades
This text of State v. Meades (State v. Meades) 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.
Opinion
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE
STATE OF DELAWARE
E. SCOTT BRADLEY 1 The Circle, Suite 2 JUDGE GEORGETOWN, DE 19947
TELEPHONE (302) 856-5256
August 26, 2019
Robert R. Meades
SBI# 00124648
James T. Vaughn Correctional Center 1181 Paddock Road
Smyrna, DE 19977
Re: Def. ID# 1101020478 Motion for Postconviction Relief - R3
LA d 92 ONY bd ALHAGS X3SSNs AUMVLONOHLOYNd A314
Dear Mr. Meades:
This is my decision on your third motion for postconviction relief. Your motion seeks for the Court to vacate your guilty plea and sentence on the grounds that the Court never held a competency hearing to determine whether you were capable of knowingly and intelligently entering such a plea. You allege that you were incompetent “at all relevant times” as evidenced by your treatment and stay
at the Delaware Psychiatric Center.
When faced with a claim for postconviction relief I must first determine whether any procedural bars prevent a consideration on the merits of any
underlying arguments.’ Superior Court Criminal Rule 61, governing
' Younger v. State, 580 A.2d 552, 554 (Del. 1990). postconviction relief, states that all such motions beyond the first must be summarily dismissed unless the movant was convicted after a trial and either (1) pleads that new evidence exists showing that the movant is actually innocent in fact, or (2) pleads that a new, retroactive constitutional rule applies to the
movant’s case thereby rendering the conviction invalid.
You were not convicted after a trial. You plead guilty to two counts of robbery in the first degree and one count of possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony on January 4, 2012. Accordingly, the procedural bars of Rule 61 require that your motion be summarily dismissed. I am therefore
barred from considering your third motion for postconviction relief on the merits. CONCLUSION
Your third motion for postconviction relief is SUMMARILY
DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
A ‘Lag E. Scott Bradley
ESB:tll cc: Prothonotary’s Office
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Meades, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-meades-delsuperct-2019.