From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martinez v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware.
Feb 23, 2016
133 A.3d 558 (Del. 2016)

Opinion

No. 623, 2015

02-23-2016

Oscar Martinez, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. State of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee.


ORDER

Leo E. Strine, Jr., Chief Justice

This 23rd day of February 2016, after careful consideration of the appellant's opening brief, the State's motion to affirm, and the record on appeal, the Court concludes that the October 23, 2015 order of the Superior Court dismissing the appellant's second motion for postconviction relief should be affirmed. The motion was subject to summary dismissal under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61 because it was the appellant's second motion for postconviction relief after he pled guilty. The appellant also failed to plead with particularity the existence of new evidence that created a strong inference of actual innocence or a new rule of constitutional law that was retroactively applicable.

Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(d)(2) (providing that second or subsequent motion for postconviction relief shall be summarily dismissed unless the movant was convicted after trial and pleads with particularity new evidence creating a strong inference that the movant is actually innocent or a claim that a new rule of constitutional law is retroactively applicable and renders the conviction invalid).

Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(d)(i).

Super. Ct. Crim. R. 61(d)(ii).

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


Summaries of

Martinez v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware.
Feb 23, 2016
133 A.3d 558 (Del. 2016)
Case details for

Martinez v. State

Case Details

Full title:Oscar Martinez, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. State of Delaware…

Court: Supreme Court of Delaware.

Date published: Feb 23, 2016

Citations

133 A.3d 558 (Del. 2016)
2016 WL 721803