Cirwithian v. State

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

JOSHUA CIRWITHIAN, §

§ No. 142, 2024 Defendant Below, §

Appellant, § Court Below–Superior Court § of the State of Delaware v. §

§ Cr. ID Nos. 1812006782 (N) STATE OF DELAWARE, § 1812014043 (N) §

Appellee. §

Submitted: October 18, 2024 Decided: December 19, 2024 Before TRAYNOR, LEGROW, and GRIFFITHS, Justices.

ORDER

After considering the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, we find it evident that the Superior Court’s March 20, 2024 order adopting the Superior Court commissioner’s report and recommendation and denying the appellant’s motion for postconviction relief1 should be affirmed. Although the appellant’s ineffective- assistance-of-counsel claims were not procedurally barred under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61,2 we agree with the Superior Court commissioner’s conclusion that the appellant could not demonstrate that he was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel under the “well-worn standards”3 of Strickland v. Washington.4 To the extent that the appellant contends that the Superior Court erred by not considering his objections to the commissioner’s report and recommendation, we note that the Superior Court did, in fact, consider (and reject) the appellant’s untimely filed objections.5

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Abigail M. LeGrow Justice