Opinion
No. 717, 2002
Submitted: January 13, 2003
Decided: February 28, 2003
Court Below-Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County Cr.A. No. IN00-05-1618
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and HOLLAND, Justices
ORDER
This 28th day of February 2003, it appears to the Court that:
(1) On December 27, 2002, defendant-appellant, Keith Perkins, filed a notice of appeal in this Court from the Superior Court's December 16, 2002 order denying his motion for transcripts. Perkins requested transcripts to assist him with his direct appeal, which is currently pending in this Court, and to assist him with his anticipated postconviction motion. While Perkins is represented by counsel in his direct appeal, he filed the instant appeal pro se.
Perkins v. State, No. 464, 2002.
(2) We have concluded that Perkins' appeal must be dismissed for the following reasons. First, Perkins, acting pro se, has no right to transcripts to assist with a direct appeal in which he is represented by counsel. Second, it is premature for Perkins to request transcripts to assist with a postconviction motion that has not yet been filed.
In re Carl J. Haskins, Jr., 551 A.2d 65, 66 (Del. 1988) (Hybrid representation is not permitted).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the within appeal is DISMISSED.