Delaware, August, 2005, State Case law

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!

State Courts - Delaware - August 5, 2005

Butler v. Div. of Family Servs., No. 282, 2004, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: There was no denial of due process or other rights in terminating a father's parental rights after Delaware agency had made extra efforts to assist parents in complying with reunification plans, to no avail, and trial judge had been scrupulous in assuring that new counsel, appointed after withdrawal of earlier counsel, had time to prepare.

Search Cases for Free

Davis v. Prado, No. 562, 2004, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: While the trial court erroneously invoked its authority as the Board of Canvass, that error was harmless, since there was no discernible prejudice to the election contestor. The trial court did have statutory jurisdiction to decide issues arising from contested City of Wilmington, Delaware, elections.

Search Cases for Free

Guess v. State, No. 111, 2005, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant's claim his confrontation clause rights, under U.S. Const. amend. VI and Del. Const. art. I, ? 7, were violated by admission of hotel employee's testimony as to hotel patron's statements was procedurally barred since he did not show cause for failing to raise claim earlier and prejudice from the alleged error, or miscarriage of justice.

Search Cases for Free

Horne v. State, No. 520, 2004, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Although Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61 did not require a trial court to obtain counsel's affidavit in response to defendant's postconviction allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, that was the preferable practice in a first postconviction motion containing ineffectiveness claims. The case was remanded for expansion of the record.

Search Cases for Free

Hubbard v. State, No. 514, 2004, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant's motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61, filed more than three years after his conviction became final, was untimely. Further, both the triggering events resulting in the violation of his probation and the filing of the report took place before defendant's probation would have concluded.

Search Cases for Free

In re Tenenbaum, No. 294, 2005, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Lawyer's conduct with clients and staffers that constituted sexual harassment and offensive touching violating Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, ?? 763 and 601 also violated Del. Law. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4, resulting in a three-year suspension from practice; affair with client violated Del. Law. R. Prof. Conduct 1.8.

Search Cases for Free

Parker v. Gadow, C.A. No. 99C-07-323 JRJ, SUPERIOR COURT OF DELAWARE, NEW CASTLE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Employee filed wrongful termination suit in state court against state agency and its personnel when her federal action for same claims was still pending. Since federal suit was not abated when state suit was filed, the Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, ? 8118 statute of limitations savings statute did not apply to "relate back" state suit's filing date.

Search Cases for Free

Thomas v. State, No. 527, 2004, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Imposition of an habitual offender sentence was upheld as (1) the sentence was not based on incorrect information; (2) defendant had a sufficient number of violent felony convictions to support the same; and (3) a challenge to a prior guilty plea to robbery was previously unsuccessful and did not warrant reconsideration.

Search Cases for Free

Upshur v. State, No. 139, 2005, SUPREME COURT OF DELAWARE, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Because the substances seized from defendant's vehicle and residence later tested positive for cocaine, defendant did not show that counsel was ineffective for failing to present the results of the initial field tests; consequently, defendant's suppression claim was barred by Del. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 61(i)(3), (4), (5).

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal