v.
State
Decided: January 2, 2018
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.
ORDER
This 2nd day of January 2018, upon consideration of the appellant’s opening brief and the appellee’s motion to affirm, it appears to the Court that:
(1) Andre McDougal filed this appeal from the Superior Court’s order dated September 12, 2017, denying his motion for correction of sentence. The State of Delaware has moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment on the ground that it is manifest on the face of McDougal’s opening brief that the appeal is without merit.[1] (4) When considering McDougal’s third motion for correction of sentence, the Superior Court again determined that the motion sought a modification of sentence. The court denied the motion after ruling that it was both untimely and repetitive under Rule 35(b)10 and because, contrary to McDougal’s claim, his VOP sentence was not governed by 11 Del. C. § 4333(b)(1). This appeal followed.
(5) We review the denial of a Rule 35 motion for abuse of discretion and review questions of law de novo.11 In this case, the record supports the Superior Court’s determination that 11 Del. C. § 4333(b)(1) did not apply in McDougal’s case because McDougal was sentenced under § 4333(d)(2). Subsection (d)(2) of § 4333 provides that the limitations in subsection (b) do not apply to any sentence imposed for any violent felony if the court determines on the record—as it did in McDougal’s case—“that public safety will be enhanced by a longer period of probation or suspension of sentence.”12
(6) Having carefully considered the parties’ submissions on appeal, we affirm the Superior Court’s denial of McDougal’s third motion for correction of sentence. Whether viewed as a motion for correction of sentence under Rule 35(a)
10 Id.
11 Jackson v. State, 2016 WL 4547896 (Del. Aug. 31 2016) (citing cases). 12 11 Del. C. § 4333(d)(2) (Supp. 2017). The transcript of McDougal’s VOP sentencing on March 2, 2011, reflects that the Superior Court imposed seventeen years of incarceration suspended after fifteen years after finding that McDougal was “a menace” who needed to be “out of society for a good, long time.” VOP Tr. at 38 (March 2, 2011).
or a motion for modification of sentence under Rule 35(b), McDougal’s motion properly was denied because it was procedurally barred and had no merit.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State’s motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice