Carrigan v. State

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE BRANDON M. CARRIGAN, §

§ Defendant Below, § No. 19, 2019 Appellant, §

§ Court Below—Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware

§ STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID Nos. 1109008434 &

§ 1503000827 (N) Plaintiff Below, § Appellee. §

Submitted: May 13, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019

Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices.

ORDER

After careful consideration of the appellant’s opening brief, the appellee’s motion to affirm, and the record on appeal, we conclude that the Superior Court’s order, dated December 13, 2018, adopting the Commissioner’s report and recommendation, dated August 21, 2018, and summarily dismissing the second motion for postconviction relief should be affirmed.1 Carrigan was not convicted after trial, he did not satisfy the requirements of Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(d)(2),2 and his claims were meritless. The Superior Court did not err in denying Carrigan’s motion for appointment of counsel and in summarily dismissing the postconviction motion.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is GRANTED and the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr. Chief Justice