State v. Torres

Opinion

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

STATE OF DELAWARE ) ) ) I.D. No. 1608013559 v. ) ) AUTHUR TORRES, ) ) Defendant. )

This 30th day of July, 2026, the Court enters the following Order:

ORDER LIFTING STAY

1. The defendant filed a motion under Rule 35(a) for relief from an allegedly

illegal sentence pursuant to the ruling of the United States Supreme Court in

Erlinger v United States (602 U.S 821 (2024)). This was one of the many

Erlinger claims from inmates at the Department of Corrections filed

throughout the Superior Court. In order to allow for an orderly consideration

of the Erlinger case, the Court stayed further action until the decisional law

began to develop as to the judicial response to Erlinger. While further

litigation may well yield refinements in the Court’s treatment of Erlinger

claims, many are ready for resolution, including this case, and the Court

therefore enters this order lifting the stay in this case. ORDER ON THE MERITS - DENIED

1. On March 9, 2017, the defendant pled guilty to Possession of a Deadly

Weapon by a Person Prohibited and Possession of Heroin Tier 1 Quantity. On

June 2, 2017, this Court sentenced the defendant as a habitual offender, under

11 Del. C. §4214 and sentenced defendant to 15 years Level V followed by

probation.

2. At the March 9, 2017, Plea Colloquy the defendant admitted to the Court

that he knew he was subject to the habitual offender statute and that he could

be sentenced up to life in prison. 1 The defendant’s plea paperwork also 0F

clearly indicated that he was subject to the habitual offender statute as a

result of the following convictions: Possession with Intent to Distribute

(1997); Possession within 300 feet of a Park (2001); and Possession with

Intent to Distribute (2012). 21F

3. In Erlinger the United States Supreme Court stated that virtually any fact

that increases the prescribed range of penalties to which a criminal defendant

is exposed must be resolved by a unanimous jury beyond a reasonable doubt

or freely admitted during in a guilty plea. Johnson v. State, 2025 WL

397431 (Del. 2025). In his plea proceeding the defendant admitted that he

1 D.I. 17, See Transcript of Plea Colloquy, p. 3-6, 9-10. 2 D.I. 17, See Plea Agreement and Truth in Sentencing Guilty Plea Form. was subject to the terms of the habitual offender statute. As such,

defendant’s case falls in line with the class of cases to which Erlinger does

not extend relief.

4. For the stated reasons, defendant’s Motion for Correction of Illegal Sentence

must be and hereby is denied, as is his request for the appointment of

counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

cc: Original to Prothonotary Arthur Torres (SBI # 00235282) Andrew Vella, Deputy Attorney General