Opinion
No. 399, 2001.
August 30, 2001.
Appeal from the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID No. 9907017204
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Unpublished Opinion is below.
WILLIAM J. WEBB, JR., Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. No. 399, 2001. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: August 20, 2001. Decided: August 30, 2001.
Court Below: Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County, Cr. ID No. 9907017204
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and STEELE, Justices.
ORDER
This 30th day of August 2001, it appears to the Court that:
1. The appellant, William Webb, pled guilty in March 2000 to first degree assault, first degree burglary, and endangering the welfare of a child.
He was sentenced on June 23, 2000. Webb has filed numerous petitions with the Superior Court seeking habeas corpus and postconviction relief. Presently, Webb has two appeals pending before this Court. Appeal No. 589, 2000 is Webb's appeal from the Superior Court's denial of his second petition for postconviction relief. Appeal No. 373, 2001 is Webb's appeal from the Superior Court's denial of his motion for relief from judgment or for a new hearing. On August 20, 2001, Webb filed another notice of appeal purportedly appealing from the Superior Court's order, dated April 19, 2001, denying his motion for transcripts at state expense.
2. Under the Delaware Constitution, only a final judgment may be reviewed by this Court in a criminal case. Del Const. Art. IV, 11( 1)(b). The denial of a motion for transcripts at state expense filed in the Superior Court is not appealable as a collateral order before the entry of a final order on any postconviction motion. Browne v. State, Del. Supr., No. 492, 1991, Walsh, J. (Jan. 21, 1992) (ORDER). Under the circumstances, although this Court does not have jurisdiction to separately review the interlocutory order from which Webb now seeks to appeal, he may raise any issues relating to the Superior Court's denial of his transcript request as part of his other appeals pending before the Court.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(c).