IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
AUGUSTUS HEBREW EVANS, JR., §
§ No. 174, 2016
Defendant Below, §
Appellant, § Court Below—Superior Court of the
§ State of Delaware
v. §
§
STATE OF DELAWARE, §
§
Plaintiff Below, §
Appellee. §
Submitted: April 19, 2016
Decided: July 5, 2016
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA, and SEITZ, Justices.
ORDER
This 5th day of July 2016, it appears to the Court that:
(1) On April 6, 2016, the appellant, Augustus Hebrew Evans, Jr., filed a
“notice of interlocutory appeal” from the Superior Court’s order dated March 2,
2016 and letter dated March 16, 2016, in Criminal Action No. 0609011528A. The
March 2 order rejected Evans’ sixth motion for postconviction relief. The March
16 letter advised Evans that while the March 2 order was on appeal,1 the court was
without jurisdiction to rule on several other applications filed by Evans.
1
Evans filed an appeal from the March 2, 2016 order on March 11, 2016, in Evans v. State, Del.
Supr. No. 121, 2016.
(2) By Order dated December 1, 2015, this Court enjoined Evans from
filing anything further related to Criminal Action No. 0609011528A unless the
filing was accompanied by the Court’s filing fee or a motion to proceed in forma
pauperis in compliance with 10 Del. C. § 8803(e), and the motion was granted by
the Court.2 When filing his “notice of interlocutory appeal” on April 6, 2016,
Evans did not submit the filing fee or a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in
compliance with 10 Del. C. § 8803.
(3) On April 6, 2016, the Clerk issued a notice directing Evans to show
cause why the appeal should not be dismissed based on this Court’s lack of
jurisdiction to entertain a criminal interlocutory appeal and for Evans’ failure to
pay the filing fee or file the motion to proceed in forma pauperis.3 On April 19,
Evans filed a response to the notice to show cause and the motion to proceed in
forma pauperis. In his response to the notice to show cause, Evans argues that the
March 16 letter is a final, appealable order, and that the appeal should not be
dismissed.
(4) Having considered Evans’ response to the notice to show cause, his
motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and the dictates of our December 1, 2015
Order, the Court concludes that Evans’ “notice of interlocutory appeal” from the
March 2 order and March 16 letter is not approved for filing and must be
2
Evans v. State, 2015 WL 7758307, at *2 (Del. Dec. 1, 2015).
3
Del. Supr. Ct. R. 29(b).
2
dismissed. The March 2 order was the subject of a prior appeal that was dismissed
on April 1, 2016, when Evans failed to respond to a notice to show cause.4 Evans
cannot file a second appeal from the March 2 order. The March 16 letter advising
Evans that the Superior Court was without jurisdiction to rule on his other
applications while the March 2 order was on appeal is not a final, appealable order.
This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider an interlocutory appeal in a criminal case.5
(5) The Court received an undated letter from Evans on April 27, 2016
that contained obscene, insulting, and threatening language directed to the Justices
of this Court. The letter was not docketed in any of Evans’ cases but was referred
to both the Capitol Police and the Department of Correction. Evans is notified that
any similar future correspondence will result in sanctions against him, which could
include monetary sanctions, loss of good time, and the filing of new criminal
charges against him.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Evans’ appeal papers are
stricken and this matter is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr.
Justice
4
Evans v. State, 2016 WL 2585786 (Del. April 1, 2016), reh’g denied, Del. Supr., No. 121, 2016
(April 21, 2016). By Order dated April 21, 2016, the Court denied Evans’ motion seeking a
rehearing en banc of the April 1 dismissal, ruling that even if Evans had filed a timely response
to the notice to show cause, the Court would not have granted him leave to appeal the March 2
order.
5
Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b).
3