Opinion
RK94-01-0082-11 RK94-01-0083-11 RK94-01-0084-11 RK94-01-0085-11 RK94-01-0265-11
04-06-2018
ORDER
This 6th day of April, 2018, upon consideration of Defendant's eleventh motion for postconviction relief with statement of facts docketed March 26, 2018.
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for postconviction relief is dismissed as procedurally barred by Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(d)(2) and 61(i)(2) as it is simply a restatement of arguments set forth in defendant's prior motions for postconviction relief. The Court dismissed Defendant's tenth motion for postconviction relief on January 31, 2018. As an eleventh motion, the claim advanced does not fall within an exception outlined in Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(d)(2) requiring summary dismissal of second or subsequent postconviction motions. Defendant's motion is independently time barred pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(i)(1) as it was filed more than one year after conviction. Defendant's motion is procedurally barred pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(i)(3) and 61(i)(4) as stated in the Court's order denying the tenth motion for postconviction relief.
/s/_________
Judge NEP/wjs
oc: Prothonotary
cc: Stephen R. Welch, Jr., Esquire for DAG Rambo
John S. Malik, Esquire
Charles B. Sanders, JTVCC