Opinion
346 2024
09-13-2024
COREY BOWERS, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Appellee.
Submitted: September 9, 2024
Court Below-Superior Court of the State of Delaware Cr. ID No. 1204010456 (N)
Before VALIHURA, TRAYNOR, and GRIFFITHS, Justices.
ORDER
Gary F. Traynor Justice
After consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant's response, it appears to the Court that:
(1) On August 22, 2024, the appellant, Corey Bowers, filed a notice of appeal from a June 10, 2024 Superior Court order denying his motion for sentence review. Under Supreme Court Rule 6, a timely notice of appeal was due on or before July 10, 2024. The Senior Court Clerk therefore issued a notice directing Bowers to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. In response to the notice to show cause, Bowers has submitted a notice of appeal from the Superior Court's September 2023 order denying a previous motion for sentence modification. Bowers does not address the untimeliness of the notice of appeal from the Superior Court's June 10, 2024 order.
This second notice of appeal is attached to a copy of the notice to show cause and bears the appeal number assigned to this appeal-346, 2024.
(2) Time is a jurisdictional requirement. A notice of appeal must be received by the Court within the applicable time period to be effective. An appellant's prisoner pro se status does not excuse his failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6. Unless an appellant can demonstrate that his failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, the appeal cannot be considered.
Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).
Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).
See Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481-82 (Del. 2012) (dismissing a prisoner's pro se appeal, filed one day late, as untimely).
Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
(3) Bowers does not claim, and the record does not reflect, that his failure to file a timely notice of appeal from the Superior Court's June 10, 2024 order is attributable to court-related personnel. Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal, and this appeal must be dismissed.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that the appeal be DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT: