Opinion
CA. No. 07X-03-003 THG.
May 22, 2007.
Guango Fitzgerald Correa ("Correa") has pending before this Court a petition seeking an expungement of his criminal history and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
I address the motion to proceed in forma pauperis first. Correa has failed to provide the Court with a copy of his inmate account summary as 10 Del. C. § 8804 requires. Correa also has failed to list on the affidavit the numerous cases which he previously has filed. Thus, the motion is DENIED because he has not complied with the statute and requirements of this Court.
The Court normally would provide Correa with the opportunity to comply with the statute and submit the information required by the affidavit. However, such time and effort would be wasteful because the Court has review ed Correa's petition and is dismissing it because it is legally and factually meritless.
Correa has filed voluminous materials. Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible to determine what it is he is seeking. He attaches copies of letters to and from various governmental agencies, copies of his criminal history, letters to other entities. Despite all of the filings, he does not state anywhere what it is he is seeking to have expunged and why he is entitled to that expungement.
This Court is aware from a criminal matter in this Court, State v. Correa, Del. Super., Def. ID# 0204015491, and a previously filed expungement matter, Correa v. State, Del. Super., C.A. No. 03X-10-005, that Correa has contended in the past that David E. Jones used his name for some crimes which appeared on Correa's criminal history. He wanted the crimes David E. Jones committed removed from his criminal history.
In connection with the above-captioned cases, this Court sent Correa a letter dated November 24, 2003, which contained the following paragraph:
4. You filed a Petition for Expungement of Criminal Record on October 27, 2003 (C.A. No. 03X-10-005-ESB). The Court will not entertain a Petition for Expungement of Criminal Record until you can provide proof that you have initiated an investigation regarding identification with the State Bureau of Identification and that investigation has been completed. Upon the conclusion of such investigation, you may file a Petition for Expungement of Criminal Record so long as you provide the Court with documentation from the State Bureau of Identification with your petition.
Paperwork Correa has submitted in the currently pending matter states that in 2005, the State Bureau of Identification removed all references to David E. Jones from Correa's criminal record and that the fingerprints for all of the offenses remaining on his criminal record matched Correa. In other words, Correa's current criminal history contains crimes for which only Correa was charged. Thus, Correa's own documentation establishes that the problem with his criminal history regarding David E. Jones has been resolved and nothing needs to be expunged from his criminal history.
However, Correa has submitted some other documents which indicate his goal has changed. It seems, although it is not perfectly clear, that he also wants this Court to remove from its system all aliases and incorrect dates of birth that have been attached to his name. That is not possible. Once another name is attached to a person, whether the name is a misspelling or a name that was provided by the defendant or a name the system attaches, that name becomes an alias and that information stays with a defendant's criminal history. The same applies to any date of birth connected to the defendant. The incorrect name and/or date of birth do not make the criminal history incorrect; in fact, they correctly reflect that the name and/or date of birth were attached to the defendant at some point some how. That information provides an accurate reflection of a defendant's criminal history. Correa is not entitled to an expungement of the aliases and incorrect dates of birth.
Correa also has submitted paperwork attacking a decision of the Court of Common Pleas in Kent County denying him a name change. If Correa is appealing that decision, he has not correctly filed the appeal. Furthermore, advancing such an argument is not a matter which belongs with a petition seeking an expungement.
Finally, Correa has filed a letter to the Sussex County Prothonotary's Office dated April 26, 2007, that contains a hodgepodge of numerous subjects, but does not actually address any of them. Because this Court cannot decipher what Correa is asserting, it will not address this filing.
In conclusion, Correa is not entitled to an expungement of his criminal history and the petition is DISMISSED.
Additionally, due to the great number of filings Correa is submitting, this Court is initiating the following procedures regarding Correa's filings.
The Prothonotary's Office is not to accept any further filings from Correa unless they comply with the rules of this Court. Any new filings either must be accompanied with a payment of costs or a complete motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 112. The complaint or petition must contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing that Correa is entitled to relief and a demand for the relief to which he deems himself entitled. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 8(a). The Court will not attempt to decipher what Correa is asserting; in particular, it will not review letters and documents to and from other entities and try to decide what claim Correa might be stating by attaching those documents. If the petition or com plaint is not clear and/or if Correa does not submit payment for costs or a completed in forma pauperis motion, the document(s) shall be returned to Correa without docketing.
Furthermore, this Court now has rendered a decision on the issue of Correa's criminal history. It will not reconsider this issue. Any pleading which attempts to repackage or restate this expungement matter shall be returned to Correa without this Court docketing the document.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 22ND DAY OF MAY, 2007.