State v. Mitchell ( 2024 )

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
STATE OF DELAWARE : Def. I.D. No.: 1801015190
:
vs. :
:
JARED MITCHELL, :
:
Defendant. :
:
ORDER
Submitted: September 23, 2024
Decided: October 8, 2024
Defendant’s Motion to Fix Terms Imprisonment Credits – GRANTED.
This 8th day of October, 2024, upon consideration of Jared Mitchell’s
(“Defendant”) “Motion to Fix Terms Imprisonment Credits” and the State’s
response, it appears to the Court that:
On January 26, 2018, Jared Mitchell was charged with Murder 1st Degree and
other charges by an Adult Complaint and Warrant. On May 8, 2018, a Rule 9
Warrant was issued for the Defendant’s arrest.
On March 28, 2018, Defendant was arrested for Possession with Intent to
Distribute a Controlled Substance in Accomack County, Virginia, and taken into
custody. The charge was nolle prossed in Virginia on June 11, 2018.
The Defendant was extradited back to Delaware on June 19, 2018. The
Defendant is requesting to be credited with 81 days while in custody in Virginia.
Section 1901(b) of Title 11 of the Delaware code states:
[a]ll sentences for criminal offenses of persons who at the time sentence
is imposed are held in custody in default of bail, or otherwise, shall
begin to run and be computed from the date of incarceration for the
offense for which said sentence shall be imposed, unless the person
sentenced shall then be undergoing imprisonment under a sentence
imposed for any other offense or offenses, in which case the said
sentence shall begin to run and be computed, either from the date of
imposition thereof or from the expiration of such other sentence or
sentences, as the court shall, in its discretion, direct.
The Delaware Supreme Court has also addressed this issue in Brown v. State,1 Noble
v. State,2 and Thompson v. State.3
In Brown, the defendant argued that he was entitled to credit for the time
served at Level V while being incarcerated in Virginia awaiting his extradition to
Delaware.4 The Supreme Court held that because the defendant was “serving
1
976 A.2d 170 (Table) (Del. 2009).
2
984 A.2d 124 (Table) (Del. 2009).
3
149 A.3d 1020 (Table) (Del. 2016).
4
Brown, at *2.
2
sentences in Virginia based upon Virginia criminal charges”5 he was not entitled to
any additional credit on his Delaware sentence.
In Noble, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to Superior Court to
receive credit for time served while being held in Pennsylvania. The records clearly
demonstrated that the defendant was being held “solely for the purpose of awaiting
extradition to Delaware and that no credit was received against any Pennsylvania
sentence.”6
In Thompson, the Supreme Court ruled that the issue of whether the defendant
was entitled to credit for time served was not ripe for appellate review. However,
the Court noted two important findings: (1) “…under Delaware law, a defendant is
entitled to Level V credit on a VOP sentence for all prior time actually served at
Level V awaiting disposition of a VOP charge” and (2) “…a defendant is not entitled
to credit for any period of incarceration on an unrelated sentence, or, in particular, a
sentence served in another jurisdiction.”7
Section 3901(b), Brown, Thompson, and Noble make it clear that a defendant
does not receive credit for time served if the defendant is serving a sentence in
another jurisdiction while awaiting extradition. In this case, the State acknowledged
5
Id.6
Noble, at *1.
7
Thompson, at *2 (quoting Brown v. State, at *1).
3
that the Defendant’s charges were nolle prossed in Virginia. Therefore, it is clear he
was not serving a sentence in Virginia.
For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion for 81
days of credit time.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Mark H. Conner
Mark H. Conner, Judge
oc: Prothonotary
cc: Casey Ewart, Deputy Attorney General
Jared Mitchell, Pro Se
4