From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware
Oct 3, 2006
No. 451, 2006 (Del. Oct. 3, 2006)

Opinion

No. 451, 2006.

Submitted: September 7, 2006.

Decided: October 3, 2006.

Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID No. 9608016951.

Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and BERGER, Justices.


ORDER


This third day of October 2006, it appears to the Court that:

(1) On August 25, 2006, the Court received the appellant's notice of appeal from the Superior Court's order, dated June 21, 2006 and docketed June 28, 2006, which found him in violation of probation. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 6, a timely notice of appeal should have been filed on or before July 28, 2006.

(2) On August 29, 2006, the Clerk issued a notice pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. The appellant filed his response to the notice to show cause on September 7, 2006. The appellant states that he was not aware that he could file an appeal until the prison librarian so informed him 45 days after he was sentenced. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 6(a) (ii), a notice of appeal from a finding of a violation of probation must be filed within 30 days after entry of the order upon the docket.

(3) Time is a jurisdictional requirement. A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk within the applicable time period in order to be effective. An appellant's pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6. Unless the appellant can demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, his appeal cannot be considered.

Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779, cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).

Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).

Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).

(4) There is nothing in the record reflecting that the appellant's failure to file a timely notice of appeal in this case is attributable to court-related personnel. Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal. Therefore, the appeal must be dismissed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 6 and 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Harris v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware
Oct 3, 2006
No. 451, 2006 (Del. Oct. 3, 2006)
Case details for

Harris v. State

Case Details

Full title:ANTOINNE HARRIS, Defendant Below-Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE…

Court:Supreme Court of Delaware

Date published: Oct 3, 2006

Citations

No. 451, 2006 (Del. Oct. 3, 2006)