Opinion
ID # 9812010539
01-26-2012
State of Delaware v. Anthony E. Morris Defendant
RESIDENT JUDGE
N440 State Mail
Anthony E. Morris
James T. Vaughn Correctional Center
1181 Paddock Road
Smyrna, DE 19977
Motion for Post Conviction Relief (R2)
Dear Mr. Morris:
In your second Motion for Post Conviction Relief pursuant to Superior Court Rule 61, ("Rule 61") you attacked the Court's jurisdiction because you never had an amenability hearing in Family Court over a dozen years ago.
This is exactly the same attack made in your first post conviction motion. The record clearly reflects that the amenability hearing was waived. You had counsel. Your mother was present.
The Supreme Court affirmed that you knowingly and voluntarily waived the amenability hearing. Morris v. State, 2010 WL 2183492 (Del.), 996 A.2d 794 (Del. 2010) (TABLE).
Therefore this second motion is procedurally barred as it comes too late [Rule 61(i)(1)] and the issue has been specifically previously adjudicated [Rule 61(i)(4)].
Your second Motion for Post Conviction Relief is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Yours very truly,
T. Henley Graves
THG:pac
cc: Prothonotary
Adam Gelof, Esquire, Department of Justice