 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Joyner v. State, No. 42,2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's notice of appeal from the denial of a request for postconviction relief was untimely because the timely filing of the notice of appeal with the superior court prothonotary did not constitute compliance with the jurisdictional requirements of Del. Sup. Ct. R. 6(a), 10(a); the notice had to be filed timely with the supreme court clerk.
|
|||||
| Potts v. State, No. 160, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal from conviction for violation of probation was untimely, and extension of time to file the appeal could not be granted as the untimely filing of an appeal under Del. Sup. Ct. R. 6(a), 10(a) was a jurisdictional defect that could not be excused in the absence of unusual circumstances not attributable to defendant or his attorney.
|
|||||
| Barnett v. State, No. 596, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant failed to establish fair and just reason required by Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 32(d) for withdrawal of guilty pleas to reduced second degree murder charge and weapons charge; defendant had agreed he was guilty under theory of accomplice liability, his claims of ineffective assistance lacked merit, and record showed he understood plea.
|
|||||
| Keith v. Sioris, C.A. NO: 05C-02-272 (RBY),
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, May 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a legal malpractice suit, the court denied plaintiff's motion for reargument. A new argument was not properly before it because a motion for reargument was not a device for raising new arguments; furthermore, a lack of causation was an additional reason why defendants were entitled to summary judgment.
|
|||||
| Parsons v. Atlantis Indus., C.A. No. 06A-10-002,
SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, SUSSEX, May 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence supported finding that unemployment benefits claimant left her position of employment without good cause under Del. Code Ann. tit. 19, § 3314(1) as evidence showed that claimant understood employer's absentee police and its vacation policy but that she still resigned when she was told that her untimely request for vacation had been denied.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, No. 37, 2007,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the trial court had the authority to revoke a probationary sentence that defendant had not yet begun to serve, pursuant to Del. Sup. Ct. R. 25(a), defendant's appeal of the sentence was without merit; therefore, the State's motion to affirm the judgment was granted.
|
|||||
| Wallace v. State, No. 361, 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, May 7, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion to correct sentence was properly denied after trial court modified sentence to reflect that defendant's original sentence included probation because original sentencing order did not reflect intent to honor the request of probation officer and give defendant two years of concurrent probation at Level III.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
