Wilkerson v. State
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
QUENTIN A. WILKERSON, § § Defendant Below, § No. 264, 2018 Appellant, § § Court Below—Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID No. 1306023969 (S) § Plaintiff Below, § Appellee. §
Submitted: August 1, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.
ORDER
After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the State’s motion
to affirm, and the record on appeal on appeal, we conclude that the Superior Court’s
letter decision denying the appellant’s motion for modification of sentence should
be affirmed. Although the appellant’s motion indicated that he went through
Probation and Parole and his treatment provider in preparing the motion, there was
no sign that Probation and Parole or his treatment provider supported the motion.
As to the appellant’s reliance on the results of a recent polygraph test to support his
position, that test occurred after the Superior Court denied the motion. The Superior Court did not have the opportunity to consider those results and we will not consider
them for the first time on appeal.1
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is
GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice
1 Supr. Ct. R. 8. 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wilkerson v. State (Wilkerson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.