State v. Wolf

Full title: STATE OF DELAWARE v. JACK WILLIAM WOLF, Defendant

Court: Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County

Date published: Feb 25, 2005

ID No. 84-09-0789-R5 (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 25, 2005)

Opinion

ID No. 84-09-0789-R5.

Submitted: November 9, 2004.

Decided: February 25, 2005.

Upon Reconsideration of Defendant's Pro Se Motion for Postconviction Relief.

ORDER

CALVIN L. SCOTT, Judge.

On September 3^rd, Defendant Jack W. Wolf, filed a Motion for Postconviction Relief pursuant to Superior Court Criminal Rule 61. Mr. Wolf subsequently filed an expansion to the Motion on November 9, 2004. The Court has determined that Wolf's motion is time-barred under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61 (i)(1), as his conviction became final on June 13, 1986. Defendant's motion is also procedurally barred under Rule 61 (i)(4), because his grounds for relief have been considered in his direct appeal and in previous motions for postconviction relief. The Court finds that Wolf's motion fails to satisfy any of the exceptions to the procedural bars set forth above. In addition, the claimed constitutional violations against prison officials in the expansion to the motion are not properly presented through a Motion for Postconviction Relief.

Therefore, because the Court finds that it is plain from the Motion for Postconviction Relief and the record in this case that Wolf is not entitled to relief, the motion is hereby DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.