State of Delaware v. Jarrell. ( 2015 )

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
RYAN M. JARRELL, )
)
Defendant-Below, )
Appellants, )
) I.D. No. 1408001556
v. )
)
STATE OF DELAWARE, )
)
Plaintiff-Below, )
Appellee. )
ORDER
On this 28th day of September, 2015, and on Appellant Ryan M. Jarrell’s
(“Jarrell”) appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, the Court finds:
1. On August 2, 2014, Jarrell was arrested for Failure to Remain in Lane,
Possession of Marijuana with an Aggravating Factor, and Driving Under
the Influence of Drugs. On March 4, 2015, the trial court conducted a
suppression hearing, where it determined that the officer had probable
cause to arrest Jarrell for suspicion of Driving Under the Influence. At
the conclusion of the suppression hearing, the case proceeded with a non-
jury trial. The trial court found Jarrell guilty of Failure to Remain in
Lane, Possession of Marijuana with an Aggravating Factor, and Driving
2
Under the Influence of Drugs. The trial court sentenced Jarrell on March
4, 2015.
2. On March 13, 2015, Jarrell, through his trial counsel, filed a Motion for
Reargument and to Stay Sentence in the Court of Common Pleas. On
March 25, 2015, Jarrell, through his trial counsel, filed his Notice of
Appeal in the Superior Court.
3. Superior Court Criminal Rule 39(a) requires that “[a]ll appeals to
Superior Court shall be taken within 15 days from the date of sentence,
unless otherwise provided by statute.” 1 Pursuant to Superior Court
Criminal Rule 39(h), an appeal may be dismissed “for lack of jurisdiction
or for failure to comply with statutory requirement or rule or order of this
court.”2 When an appeal is untimely, the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear
the appeal on its merits and the appeal should be dismissed.3
4. An untimely Motion for Reargument will not toll the time to file an
appeal. 4 The Court of Common Pleas applies Court of Common Pleas
Civil Rule 59(e) at the time requirement for motions for reargument in
criminal proceedings, as there is no specific rule in the Court of Common
1
Super. Ct. Crim. R. 39(a).
2
Super. Ct. Crim. R. 39(h).
3
State v. Reid, 1988 WL 90563, *2 (Del. Super. Jul. 19, 1988) (dismissing the State’s appeal for
lack of jurisdiction by failing to meet the time requirements.).
4
Walls v. State, 2008 WL 1778243, *1 (Del. Apr. 21, 2008).
3
Pleas Criminal Rules. 5 Under Court of Common Pleas Civil Rule 59(e),
“a motion for reargument shall be served and filed within 5 days after the
filing of the Court’s opinion or decision.” 6 The Delaware Supreme Court
has consistently dismissed untimely appeals where it also found the
motion for reargument was untimely filed, because the untimely motion
for reargument failed to toll the time for an appeal. 7
5. In this case, Jarrell’s appeal fails because it was filed more than 15 days
after the sentence was ordered. The trial court sentenced Jarrell on
March 4, 2015. An appeal from the trial court’s decision must have been
filed by March 19, 2015. Jarrell did not file his notice of appeal in the
Superior Court until March 25, 2015, which is 21 days after the trial
court sentenced him.
6. Moreover, Jarrell’s motion for reargument that he filed with the trial
court does not toll the time for filing his appeal in this Court because
Jarrell’s motion for reargument was also untimely. The motion for
reargument must have been filed by March 11, 2015, which is 5 days
from the trial court’s sentence, excluding the weekend. Jarrell did not
file his motion for reargument until March 13, 2015. Thus, Jarrell’s
motion for reargument was also untimely. Jarrell does not provide any
5
State v. Kelsch, 2015 WL 1022189, *1 (Del. Com. Pl. Mar. 10, 2015).
6
Ct. Com. Pl. Civ. R. 59(e).
7
See Walls, 2008 WL 1778243, at *1; Whitfield v. State, 981 A.2d 1174 (TABLE) (Del. 2009).
4
case law or legally cognizable argument for the untimely filing of his
motion for reargument.
7. Jarrell’s motion for reargument was untimely. It then follows that the
untimely filing of Jarrell’s motion for reargument did not toll the time for
Jarrell’s appeal. Accordingly, this Court concludes that Jarrell’s appeal
of his convictions in the Court of Common Pleas must be dismissed on
jurisdictional grounds. For these reasons, Jarrell’s appeal from the Court
of Common Pleas’ March 4, 2015 decision is DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Calvin L. Scott
Judge Calvin L. Scott, Jr.
5