holding this Court "did not err in concluding that appellant lacked standing to pursue a motion for postconviction relief because appellant had completed his sentence and thus was no longer 'in custody or subject to future custody' under the sentence for which postconviction relief was sought."
Summary of this case from State v. MartinNo. 580, 2006.
October 23, 2007.
Appeal from the Superior (Sussex) Cr 0002014519.
Decisions Without Published Opinions Affirmed.
holding this Court "did not err in concluding that appellant lacked standing to pursue a motion for postconviction relief because appellant had completed his sentence and thus was no longer 'in custody or subject to future custody' under the sentence for which postconviction relief was sought."
Summary of this case from State v. Martinholding this Court "did not err in concluding that appellant lacked standing to pursue a motion for postconviction relief because appellant had completed his sentence and thus was no longer 'in custody or subject to future custody' under the sentence for which postconviction relief was sought."
Summary of this case from State v. JacksonFull title:Pumphrey v. State
Court:Supreme Court of Delaware
Date published: Oct 23, 2007
State v. Ruiz, 956 A.2d 643 (TABLE), 2008 WL 1961187 at *2 (Del. Supr. May 7, 2008), (citing Pumphrey v.…
State v. SpadyState v. Ruiz, 956 A.2d 643 (TABLE), 2008 WL 1961187 at *2 (Del. Supr. May 7, 2008), (citing Pumphrey v.…