Bowers v. State

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

COREY BOWERS, §
§ No. 346, 2024
Defendant Below, §
Appellant, § Court Below–Superior Court
§ of the State of Delaware
v. §
§ Cr. ID No. 1204010456 (N)
STATE OF DELAWARE, §
§
Appellee. §

Submitted: September 9, 2024
Decided: September 13, 2024

Before VALIHURA, TRAYNOR, and GRIFFITHS, Justices.

ORDER

After consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant’s response,

it appears to the Court that:

(1) On August 22, 2024, the appellant, Corey Bowers, filed a notice of

appeal from a June 10, 2024 Superior Court order denying his motion for sentence

review. Under Supreme Court Rule 6, a timely notice of appeal was due on or before

July 10, 2024. The Senior Court Clerk therefore issued a notice directing Bowers to

show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. In response

to the notice to show cause, Bowers has submitted a notice of appeal from the

Superior Court’s September 2023 order denying a previous motion for sentence
modification.1 Bowers does not address the untimeliness of the notice of appeal

from the Superior Court’s June 10, 2024 order.

(2) Time is a jurisdictional requirement.2 A notice of appeal must be

received by the Court within the applicable time period to be effective.3 An

appellant’s prisoner pro se status does not excuse his failure to comply strictly with

the jurisdictional requirements of Supreme Court Rule 6.4 Unless an appellant can

demonstrate that his failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-

related personnel, the appeal cannot be considered.5

(3) Bowers does not claim, and the record does not reflect, that his failure

to file a timely notice of appeal from the Superior Court’s June 10, 2024 order is

attributable to court-related personnel. Consequently, this case does not fall within

the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal,

and this appeal must be dismissed.

1
This second notice of appeal is attached to a copy of the notice to show cause and bears the appeal
number assigned to this appeal—346, 2024.
2
Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).
3
Del. Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).
4
See Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481-82 (Del. 2012) (dismissing a prisoner’s pro se appeal, filed one
day late, as untimely).
5
Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).
2
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court

Rule 29(b), that the appeal be DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gary F. Traynor
Justice

3