holding appellant could not collaterally attack sentences on convictions underlying VOP in appeal from VOP
Summary of this case from Chapman v. StateNo. 357, 2005.
February 21, 2006.
Appeal from Superior (Sussex) Cr 9906016291.
AFFIRMED.
holding appellant could not collaterally attack sentences on convictions underlying VOP in appeal from VOP
Summary of this case from Chapman v. Stateholding appellant could not collaterally attack sentences on convictions underlying VOP in appeal from VOP
Summary of this case from Chapman v. Statefinding appellant could not collaterally attack sentences on convictions underlying VOP in appeal from VOP
Summary of this case from Holmes v. Statefinding appellant could not collaterally attack sentences on convictions underlying VOP in appeal from VOP
Summary of this case from Holmes v. Statefinding appellant could not collaterally attack sentences on convictions underlying VOP in appeal from VOP
Summary of this case from Holmes v. StateFull title:ELEY v. STATE
Court:Supreme Court of Delaware
Date published: Feb 21, 2006
The circumstances of Holmes' 2011 guilty plea to aggravated menacing, the conviction underlying his probation…
Holmes v. StateThe circumstances of Holmes' 2011 guilty plea to aggravated menacing, the conviction underlying his probation…