Opinion
ID No. 0612011599.
Submitted: July 5, 2007.
Decided: July 9, 2007.
On Defendant's "Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Comply with the Interstate Agreement on Detainers"; DENIED.
Abigail R. Layton, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware.
Robert Roberts, #342-232, Westover, Maryland.
Dear Ms. Layton and Mr. Roberts:
Defendant was charged with Robbery Second Degree, Offensive Touching, and Terroristic Threatening, arising out of a robbery in Newark, Delaware on February 21, 2006. Following this robbery, Defendant was picked up on charges in Cecil County, Maryland and sentenced to 15 years for Assault First Degree on March 7, 2007. He is currently serving that sentence at the Cecil County Detention Center.
Defendant claims in his motion that he made a formal request for disposition of the Delaware charges against him in "Dec 2006/ March 2007." Defendant further asserts that the State has failed to bring him to trial within 180 days of his request as required by Interstate Agreement on Detainers ("IAD"). Therefore Defendant requests that the Court dismiss the indictment against him.
Def. Mot. to Dismiss, D.I. 6, at 2.
Under the IAD "prisoners incarcerated in a foreign state who have charges pending in Delaware have specific rights to a trial in Delaware within 180 days of the giving of proper written notice of a demand for same." Proper written notice must be "given or sent by the prisoner to the Commissioner of Correction or other official having custody of him, who shall promptly forward it together with the certification to the appropriate prosecuting official and court by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested." In addition, the written notice must be actually received by the Court and the State.
State v. Davis, 1993 WL 138993 (Del.Super.).
Id. at § 2542(g).
Defendant was not sentenced in Maryland until March 7, 2007. Therefore, Defendant would not have been eligible to file notice pursuant to the IAD until that date. Furthermore, there is no indication in this Court's docket or in the State's records that any such request was received. The Maryland State Department of Correction also confirmed that they do not have and have not sent an IAD request to the State.
State's Resp. to Def. Mot. to Dismiss, D.I. 8, at 1.
Id. at 2.
Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.