State v. Bowen ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    STATE OF DELAWARE,
    Plaintiff,
    Cr. ID. NO. 0410015936
    DALE J. BOWEN,
    Defendant.
    Submitted: January 8, 2018
    Decided: January 25, 2018
    On Defendant’s Motion for Sentence Modiflcation
    DENIED
    ORDER
    JOHNSTON, J.
    l. On December 2, 2005, Defendant Was sentenced as an habitual offender
    pursuant to ll Del. C. §4214(a). The sentence Was corrected on October l3, 2006.
    2. The predicate convictions Were:
    Distribution of Cocaine (Virginia 1998)
    Attempted Obtaining Money by False Pretenses (Virginia 1999)
    Receiving Stolen Property (DelaWare 2002)
    Felony Theft (DelaWare 2002); and
    Robbery Second Degree (DelaWare 2002).
    3. Defendant argues that Section 4214 must be strictly construed Under
    Section 4214(0), a predicate conviction in another state must be the same or
    equivalent to a Delaware felony named in the habitual offender statute. Both the
    foreign and Delaware statutes must contain identical elements.
    4. Defendant contends that the Virginia conviction for Attempted Obtaining
    Money by False Pretenses is not equivalent to a qualifying Delaware criminal
    offense. Defendant concedes that the remaining convictions meet the statutory
    requirements for habitual offender designation.
    5. The State responded With two arguments. First, Defendant’s Virginia
    conviction for Attempted Obtaining Money by False Pretenses qualifies as a
    predicate offense. Second, Defendant is an habitual offender even absent this
    Virginia conviction.
    5. The Court finds that the State has met the Section 4214(a) requirements
    for habitual offender status by proving the existence of three separate prior felony
    convictions, each of Which arose after sentencing on the previous offense, With
    some chance for rehabilitation after each sentencing.' The inclusion by the State of
    a non-qualifying conviction over and above the necessary three, does not invalidate
    the Court’s approval of the Motion to Declare Defendant an Habitual Offender.2
    THEREFORE, Defendant’s Motion for Sentence Modification is hereby
    DENIED.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    .'Jqu/ton, Judge
    oc: Prothonotary
    cc: Dale Bowen, SBI No. 0410015936
    'See Hall v. State, 473 A.Zd 352, 356-57 (Del. 1984); Buckingham v. State, 482 A.Zd 327, 330 (Del. 1984).
    2Coble v. State, 
    2012 WL 1952293
    , at * l-2 (Del.).
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 0410015936

Judges: Johnston J.

Filed Date: 1/25/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/25/2018