Opinion
109 2024
10-22-2024
LABEEB PERKINS, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Appellee.
Submitted: September 23. 2024
Court Below-Superior Court of the State of Delaware Cr. ID No. 1909005650 (N)
Before VALIHURA, TRAYNOR, and LEGROW, Justices.
ORDER
Gary F. Traynor, Justice
After consideration of the brief and motion to withdraw filed by the appellant's counsel under Supreme Court Rule 26(c), the State's response, and the record on appeal, it appears to the Court that:
(1) On February 16, 2022, a Superior Court jury found the appellant, Labeeb Perkins, guilty of second-degree unlawful sexual contact. On February 16, 2024, the Superior Court sentenced Perkins, effective December 11, 2023, to two years of Level V incarceration, suspended after ninety days for one year of Level III supervision. This is Perkins's direct appeal.
Sentencing was originally scheduled for June 10, 2022, but Perkins failed to appear and a capias was issued for his arrest. The capias was not returned until December 2023.
(2) On appeal, Perkins's counsel ("Counsel") filed a brief and a motion to withdraw under Rule 26(c). Counsel asserts that, based upon a complete and careful examination of the record, there are no arguably appealable issues. Counsel informed Perkins of the provisions of Rule 26(c) and provided him with a copy of the motion to withdraw and the accompanying brief.
(3) Counsel also informed Perkins of his right to identify any points he wished this Court to consider on appeal. Perkins has not provided points for this Court's consideration. The State has responded to the Rule 26(c) brief and has moved to affirm the Superior Court's judgment.
(4) When reviewing a motion to withdraw and an accompanying brief under Rule 26(c), this Court must: (i) be satisfied that defense counsel has made a conscientious examination of the record and the law for arguable claims; and (ii) conduct its own review of the record and determine whether the appeal is so totally devoid of at least arguably appealable issues that it can be decided without an adversary presentation.
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83 (1988); Leacock v. State, 690 A.2d 926, 927-28 (Del. 1996).
(5) This Court has reviewed the record carefully and has concluded that Perkins's appeal is wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable issue. We also are satisfied that Counsel has made a conscientious effort to examine the record and the law and has properly determined that Perkins could not raise a meritorious claim on appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court be AFFIRMED. The motion to withdraw is moot.