Opinion
I.D. No. 1102005007
10-03-2017
STATE OF DELAWARE, v. JAMIL S. BAILEY, Defendant.
ORDER
Upon consideration of Defendant's Motion for Modification of Sentence; Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(b); the facts, arguments, and legal authorities set forth in Defendant's Motion; statutory and decisional law; and the record in this case, IT APPEARS THAT:
D.I. 73.
Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(b).
1. On June 8, 2017, the Court sentenced Bailey on a Violation of Probation to 5 years at supervision Level V, with credit for 9 days previously served, suspended for 7 months at supervision Level IV, hold at supervision Level V until space is available at supervision Level IV, no probation to follow.
The conviction for which he was on probation was Possession with Intent to Deliver.
2. Bailey now asks that the Court reduce his Level IV time so he can start a new job.
3. A motion for modification of partial confinement or probation is not subject to the ninety-day limitation applicable to a motion for reduction of imprisonment. Pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 4333, any probation or suspension of sentence may be terminated by the court at any time.
4. Relief under Rule 35(b) is a discretionary function of this Court. Although the Rule does not set forth specific criteria which must be met before the Court may grant a Rule 35(b) motion, common sense dictates that the Court may modify a sentence if present circumstances indicate that the previously imposed sentence is no longer appropriate.
5. The instant Motion is Bailey's fourth request for sentence modification. Pursuant to Criminal Rule 35(b), the Court will not consider repetitive
requests for reduction or modification of sentence. Unlike the 90-day jurisdictional limit with its "extraordinary circumstances" exception, the bar to repetitive motions has no exception. Instead, this bar absolutely "prohibits repetitive requests for reduction of sentence."
6. Bailey was sentenced to 5 years at supervision Level V, suspended for 7 months at supervision Level IV because he violated his probation within one week of being sentenced on a prior Violation of Probation.
7. The sentence at issue is appropriate for all the reasons stated at the time of sentencing. No additional information has been provided to the Court that would warrant a reduction or modification of this sentence.
D.I. 72.
D.I. 34. Bailey was sentenced to 15 years at supervision Level V with credit for 461 days previously served, suspended after 4 years at supervision Level V for 12 years at supervision Level IV work release, suspended after 9 months at supervision Level IV for 2 years at supervision Level III, hold at supervision Level V until space is available at supervision Level IV Work Release.
D.I. 73.
State v. Redden, 111 A.3d 602, 609 (Del. Super. Ct. 2015).
Id. at 605.
State v. Johnson, 2006 WL 3872849, at *3 (Del. Super. Dec. 7, 2006).
See D.I. 35, 37, 39, 73.
State v. Culp, 2016 WL 7176720, at *2 (Del. Dec. 8, 2016) ("A motion is 'repetitive' as that term is used in Rule 35(b) when it is preceded by an earlier Rule 35(b) motion, even if the subsequent motion raises new arguments."); Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35(b).
Thomas v. State, 2002 WL 31681804, at *1 (Del. 2002). See also Jenkins v. State, 2008 WL 2721536, at *1 (Del. 2008) (explaining that Rule 35(b) "prohibits the filing of repetitive sentence reduction motions."); Morrison v. State, 2004 WL 716773, at *2 (Del. 2004) (explaining that the "motion was repetitive, which also precluded its consideration by the Superior Court.").
D.I. 72. --------
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Sentence Modification is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
Jan R. Jurden, President Judge Original to Prothonotary:
cc: Jamil Bailey (SBI# 00595074)