IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
THOMAS L. FLEETWOOD, §
§
Defendant Below, § No. 168, 2017
Appellant, §
§ Court Below—Superior Court
v. § of the State of Delaware
§
STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID No. 1503013906
§
Plaintiff Below, §
Appellee. §
Submitted: May 1, 2017
Decided: May 5, 2017
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA, and VAUGHN, Justices.
ORDER
This 5th day of May 2017, it appears to the Court that:
(1) On April 17, 2017, the appellant, Thomas L. Fleetwood, filed a notice
of appeal from a January 13, 2017 Superior Court order denying his motion for
appointment of counsel and motion for transcripts at State expense. Fleetwood
filed the motion in connection with his first motion for postconviction relief. The
Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Fleetwood to show cause why his
appeal should not be dismissed based on this Court’s lack of jurisdiction under
Article IV, § 11(1)(b) of the Delaware Constitution to hear an interlocutory appeal
in a criminal case.
(2) In his response to the notice to show cause, Fleetwood states that he
does not understand what an interlocutory order is, he previously received an
identical notice to show cause dated February 13, 2017, and he needs a ten day
extension to respond to the notice to show cause. A review of the Supreme Court
docket reflects that Fleetwood previously filed an appeal of the Superior Court’s
January 13, 2017 order in appeal No. 69, 2017. That appeal was dismissed as
interlocutory on March 2, 2017.1 Given that this is the second time Fleetwood has
filed a notice of appeal from the Superior Court’s January 13, 2017 order,
Fleetwood’s request for an extension to respond to the notice to show cause is
denied.
(3) Under the Delaware Constitution, this Court may review only a final
judgment in a criminal case.2 The Superior Court’s denial of Fleetwood’s motion
for appointment of counsel and motion for transcripts at State expense is an
interlocutory, not final, order.3 This Court therefore does not have jurisdiction to
review this appeal.4 When the Superior Court rules on Fleetwood’s motion for
postconviction relief, there will be a final order for Fleetwood to appeal.
1
Fleetwood v. State, 2017 WL 837690 (Del. Mar. 2, 2017).
2
Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b).
3
See, e.g., Harris v. State, 2013 WL 4858990, at *1 (Del. Sept. 10, 2013) (holding Superior
Court order denying motion for appointment of counsel is an interlocutory order).
4
Gottlieb v. State, 697 A.2d 400, 401 (Del. 1997).
2
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),
that this appeal is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Karen L. Valihura
Justice
3