Opinion
Def. ID# 9907005746 (R-2)
05-27-2014
RE: State of Delaware v. Harold W. Smith, Jr.
JUDGE
Harold W. Smith, Jr.
SBI# 002
S.C.I.
P.O. Box 500
Georgetown, DE 19947
Dear Mr. Smith:
Defendant Harold W. Smith, Jr. ("defendant") has filed a motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel with regard to his violation of probation ("VOP") hearing which took place on September 27, 2013. As the Delaware Supreme Court has explained: "Because there is no constitutional right to counsel at a VOP hearing, ... [a defendant's] purported ineffective assistance of counsel claim ... must fail."
The Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court's judgment in Smith v. State, 85 A.3d 89, 2014 WL 637057 (Del. Feb. 6, 2014).
Schoolfield v. State, 73 A.3d 502, 2013 WL 3807471 (Del. July 18, 2013) (footnote and citation omitted).
Thus, defendant's motion for postconviction relief is denied.
It is more efficient to dispose of this matter on the merits rather than examine the procedural bars which also would require denial of the motion.
--------
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
Richard F. Stokes cc: Prothonotary's Office
Department of Justice
Office of the Public Defender