Webb Jr. v. State

• Court: Supreme Court of Delaware
• Decided: March 16, 2026
• Docket: 341, 2025
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

WILLIAM J. WEBB JR., § § No. 341, 2025 Defendant Below, § Appellant, § Court Below–Superior Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § Cr. ID Nos. 1902015015 (N) STATE OF DELAWARE, § 1904001943 (N) § 1906000296 (N) Appellee. §

Submitted: March 9, 2026 Decided: March 16, 2026

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and GRIFFITHS, Justices.

ORDER

After consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant’s response,

it appears to the Court that:

(1) On August 6, 2025, the appellant, William Webb Jr., filed a notice of

appeal from the Superior Court’s July 11, 2025 order denying his motion for

postconviction relief. On August 28, the Court issued a briefing schedule directing

Webb to file his opening brief and appendix by September 29. On September 30,

the Court, sua sponte, extended that deadline to October 10. On October 14, Webb

asked the Court to extend the deadline to December 24, a request that the Court

granted. On December 30, the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice of brief deficiency

because Webb had not filed his opening brief by the new December 24 deadline. Instead of filing his opening brief, Webb sought a 45-day extension to file his brief.

The Court granted the request and set a new deadline set for February 9, 2026. The

Court noted that no further extensions would be granted.

(2) On February 11, the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice of brief

deficiency because Webb had not filed his opening brief by the new February 9

deadline. Webb did not respond. On February 26, the Chief Deputy Clerk sent a

notice directing Webb to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for

his failure to diligently prosecute his appeal by filing his opening brief and appendix.

(3) In his response to the notice to show cause, Webb claims, among other

things, that he is not required to file an opening brief under the Court’s rules. Not

so. Webb filed the appeal in this Court, and it is his duty to diligently prosecute it

by filing an opening brief.1 Webb has not established good cause for his failure to

file an opening brief, and the appeal must therefore be dismissed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is

DISMISSED under Supreme Court Rule 29(b).

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Chief Justice

1 Proctor v. Ranger Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31883047, at *1 (Del. Dec. 27, 2002) (dismissing an appeal, over the appellant’s objection, for the appellant’s failure to file an opening brief); see Del. Supr. Ct. R. 14(b)(vi)A.(3) (“The merits of any argument that is not raised in the body of the opening brief shall be deemed waived and will not be considered by the Court on appeal.”). 2