MILLER v. STATE, 23 A.3d 865 (Del. 2011)

JOHN E. MILLER, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee.

No. 81, 2011.Supreme Court of Delaware.Submitted: April 7, 2011.
Decided: June 20, 2011.

Court Below — Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID No. 0607013529.

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

ORDER
RANDY J. HOLLAND, Justice.

This 20th day of June 2011, having considered the opening brief filed by the appellant, John E. Miller, and the motion to affirm filed by the appellee, State of Delaware, the Court concludes that the summary denial of Miller’s motion for postconviction relief should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court’s order dated January 21, 2011.[*] The Superior Court did not err when ruling that Miller’s postconviction motion sought a sentence modification in a non-capital case and thus was not cognizable under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

[*] State v. Miller, 2011 WL 300248 (Del. Super.) (summarily denying postconviction motion under Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(d)(4), which allows for summary dismissal of a motion if it plainly appears that the movant is not entitled to relief).

jdjungle