State v. Williams
Opinion
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
STATE OF DELAWARE, ) ) v. ) ID No. 1906010188 ) PAUL WILLIAMS, ) ) Defendant. )
Date Submitted: October 1, 2020 Date Decided: October 22, 2020
ORDER
Upon consideration of Defendant’s pro se Motion for Transcripts and
Affidavit in Support of Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, IT APPEARS
THAT:
1. On October 1, 2020, Defendant filed a Motion for Transcripts along
with an Affidavit in Support of Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis.1 In his
Motion, Defendant asks the Court to produce his December 6, 2019 Suppression
Hearing transcript and his December 17, 2019 Hearing transcript at the State’s
expense.2 In support of his Motion, Defendant states that he needs the requested
transcripts for the following reasons: “Post Conviction Relief + Notice of Appeal.”3
1 D.I. 40. 2 Id. 3 Id. 2. To begin, “a defendant does not have a right to free transcript[s] in order
to pursue postconviction relief in the absence of a showing of good cause.”4 The
Constitution requires the Court to certify that transcripts “are necessary to decide
non-frivolous issues in a pending case.”5 Further, Delaware Superior Court Criminal
Rule 61(d)(4) provides that the Court “may order the preparation of a transcript of
any part of the prior proceedings in the case needed to determine whether the movant
may be entitled to relief.”6 It is therefore within the Court’s discretion to review a
defendant’s motion and the record to determine whether transcripts should be
prepared at State expense.7 “When a defendant offers no factual basis and fails to
clearly identify the fundamental rights he claims were violated, the Court will deny
the motion.”8 Here, Defendant’s Motion does not show the requisite good cause.9
Nor does it provide any basis—factual or legal—for Defendant’s desire to pursue
postconviction relief.10 Accordingly, the Court declines to provide Defendant with
4 Johnson v. State, 2013 WL 6858400, at *1 (Del. Dec. 24, 2013) (citation omitted); see also Demby v. State, 2014 WL 4898138, at *2 (Del. Sept. 29, 2014) (citations omitted). 5 State v. Russell, 2019 WL 6248340, at *1 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 15, 2019) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (quoting State v. Whitfield, 2007 WL 3108331, at *1 (Del. Super. Ct. Oct. 23, 2007)). 6 Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(d)(4) (emphasis added). 7 Russell, 2019 WL 6248340, at *1 (citation omitted). 8 Id. (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Allen, 2002 WL 31814750, at *1 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 4, 2002)). 9 D.I. 40. 10 Id. 2 the requested transcripts at State expense for the purpose of pursuing postconviction
relief.
3. Defendant also states that he needs the transcripts to pursue a direct
appeal. In general, “indigent defendants have a right to transcripts at State expense
on appeal.”11 But “absent a showing that there is some legal or factual basis for
relief and that there is a particularized need for a transcript on appeal, the Superior
Court is within its discretion to deny a transcript at State expense.”12 Defendant has
failed to provide any reasons for wanting to pursue a direct appeal.13 So the Court
cannot determine whether Defendant has a particularized need for the transcripts he
requests.14 Accordingly, the Court declines to provide Defendant with the requested
transcripts at State expense for the purpose of pursuing a direct appeal.
NOW THEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion for
Transcript is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11 Demby v. State, 2014 WL 4898138, at *2 (Del. Sept. 29, 2014) (citing Miller v. State, 2008 WL 623236, at *2 (Del. Mar. 7, 2008). 12 Robinson v. State, 2003 WL 1869909, at *2 (Del. Apr. 10, 2003) (citing United States v. MacCollum, 426 U.S. 317, 330 (1976)). 13 D.I. 40. 14 See State v. Monroe, 2008 WL 3865338, at *1 (Del. Super. Ct. Aug. 12, 2008) (denying a request for transcripts when the defendant made no showing as to why he needed them). 3 Jan R. Jurden
Jan R. Jurden, President Judge
Original to Prothonotary
cc: Paul Williams (SBI# 00470169) Colleen Durkin, DAG
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Williams (State v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.