Opinion
Def. ID #9912011776
March 8, 2002
Motion for Post Conviction Relief (R-1).
Jermaine E. Hall, SBI #00334855, Sussex Correctional Institution, Georgetown, DE.
Dear Mr. Hall:
On February 14, 2002, you filed a Motion for Post Conviction Relief. I have reviewed it, together with your file. This is the Court's decision denying your application for post conviction relief.
In your pro se Rule 61 application you make the following arguments; you argue that your attorney was ineffective at the time of your initial guilty plea when he failed to inform you that if you violated probation you could go to jail, and your attorney failed to inform that you would be required to waive your constitutional rights under the eighth amendment to cruel and unusual punishment. You characterize the substance abuse programs at Key and Crest as cruel and unusual punishment. You argue that the Key-Crest treatment contract you must sign is a "clearly disguised waiver of your United States constitutional right" against cruel and unusual punishment. You argue that it is illegal for the courts to impose drug and alcohol treatment as a condition of sentencing. You argue that you should have had appointed counsel at your violation of probation hearing. Finally, you argue that at the time of your initial guilty plea you were never advised of the possible penalties you could receive if convicted for violation of probation.
HISTORY
On January 24, 2000, you entered a guilty plea to Maintaining a Dwelling. The plea was negotiated under Rule 11(e)(1)(c). You received the negotiated sentence of three years, suspended for Crest. Upon successful completion of Crest, you were placed at Level 3 probation for two years. You were held at Level 3 while awaiting a Crest bed.
TASC was monitoring you while you waited at Level 3 for the Crest bed. Because you did well, at that time, TASC recommended that the Crest portion of the sentence be removed from your sentence. The sentence was modified based upon the TASC recommendation, and Crest was removed by order of March 4, 2000. Unfortunately, you went back to using drugs and absconded from probation.
On June 8, 2001, your probation was violated and you were sentenced to the Key and Crest programs. You appealed, and the Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed the sentence imposed arising from the violation of probation on October 31, 2001. Jermaine Hall v. State of Delaware, Del. Supr. No. 314, 2001, Steele, J. (October 31, 2001) (ORDER)
Upon your application, I corrected the sentencing order on November 28, 2001, by reducing the amount of Level 3 probation. Motions to modify, seeking the removal of Key and Crest conditions, were denied.
PROCEDURAL BARS
Under Superior Court Rule 61(i) this Court has the responsibility to consider the procedural bars set forth in the rule. If the procedural bars are applicable, the Court must apply them and should not consider the merits of the claim. Younger v. State, Del.Supr., 580A.2d 552 (1990)
Your complaint that you did not have counsel and should have had court-appointed counsel is procedurally barred. You raised this on appeal to Supreme Court, and your appeal was denied. This issue has been previously adjudicated and therefore is barred under Rule 61(i)(4). The remaining claims will be discussed below.
DISCUSSION
As to your complaint that you were not advised of the possible penalties that you could receive at a violation of probation, the record evidences the contrary. The guilty plea form, which you signed at the time the plea was entered, indicates that the maximum penalty was zero to three years. The plea agreement, which you signed under Rule 11(e)(1)(c), clearly indicated that you receive three years incarceration, suspended for the Crest Program; and subsequent probation. The sentence you received tracked the negotiated plea agreement. The transcript confirms you were aware of the consequences of waiving your trial as well, as the sentence which was suspended. I conclude that the record belies your claims. Additionally, your attorney was not ineffective. You claim he did not tell you that a violation of probation could result in jail. When you entered this plea it was on the Track I calendar. This means you were already on probation and facing jail time on all the charges. I find your claim that you didn't know you could go to jail if you violated probation to be incredulous.
The three grounds alleged concerning your requirement to complete the Key and Crest Programs as a condition of your sentence are also denied. Your conclusory claims concerning the substance abuse programs being cruel and unusual punishment are frivolous. While therapeutic communities are not designed to be "warm and fuzzy", they are one of the most effective rehabilitation tools available for substance abusers. These claims are denied.
Your final claim is that there is no legal basis for the Key and Crest programs. You are mistaken. See Gregory Phillips v. State, Del.Supr., No. 132, 2001, Berger J. (Feb. 11, 2002) (ORDER)
Defendant's Motion for Post Conviction Relief is denied.
I am also denying your most recent modification request. I understand you have just recently entered Key. Stick with it and earn your release.
SO ORDERED.