Opinion
ID No. 0611018775, Cr.A. #: IN-06-12-1069.
September 16, 2009.
ORDER Upon Defendant's Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence — DENIED.
ORDER
1. The court sentenced Defendant to three years in prison as a habitual offender under 11 Del. C. § 4214(a), followed by one year of transitional probation under 11 Del. C. § 4204(l).
2. Defendant contends that transitional probation under 11 Del . C. § 4204(l) is capped by the statute at six months. He relies on Larson v. State.
Larson v. State, Del. Supr., 659 A.2d 228 (TABLE), 1995 WL 236650.
3. In this case's context, Defendant misreads the statute and Larson.
4. Sentences imposed under 11 Del. C. § 4214(a) cannot be suspended. Eleven Del. C. § 4204(l), however, requires that whenever the court imposes a sentence of, or totaling more than, one year in prison, it must also impose "a period of custodial supervision . . . of not less than six months[.]" Thus, 11 Del. C. § 4204(l), by its terms, sets a minimum custodial sentence: six months.
5. Section 4204(l) does not speak directly to a maximum sentence. Larson, however, establishes that if the court sentences Defendant to the maximum prison sentence, the custodial sentence mandated by 11 Del. C. § 4204(l) is then capped at six months. The sentence in Larson was not defective because it was longer than six months; it was defective because it exceeded the statutory maximum for the crime by more than six months.
6. Here, the § 4214(a) sentence exceeds one year in prison, but Defendant did not receive the maximum § 4214(a) sentence: life imprisonment. (A life sentence under 11 Del. C. § 4214(a) is tantamount to a fixed term of 45 years.) Accordingly, the court was required to impose no less than six months transitional probation under 11 Del. C. § 4204(l). The transitional probation, however, was not capped in this case at six months, as Defendant contends. The probation was only capped by 11 Del. C. § 4204(l) at six months if Defendant had received the maximum sentence under § 4214(a), which he did not receive.
Crosby v. State, 824 A.2d 894, 902 (Del. 2003) (citing 11 Del. C. § 4346).
7. Taking Defendant's criminal history into account, a six-month transitional probation is not enough to demonstrate Defendant's rehabilitation and to protect the public from him. It remains to be seen whether Defendant will be able to stay out of criminal trouble for a year after he is released. In any event, the one-year transitional probation here falls within the possible maximum sentence and, therefore, it is legal.
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's June 22, 2009, Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.