IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
JONATHAN S. HALL, §
§ No. 196,2020
Defendant Below, §
Appellant, §
§
v. § Court Below: Superior Court
§ of the State of Delaware
STATE OF DELAWARE, §
§ Cr. I.D. Nos. 1507014587 (N)
Plaintiff Below, § 1507024327 (N)
Appellee. §
Submitted: July 6, 2020
Decided: August 5, 2020
Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; TRAYNOR and MONTGOMERY-REEVES,
Justices.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the notice to show cause and the responses thereto, it
appears to the Court that:
(1) On June 8, 2020, the appellant, Jonathan Hall, filed a notice of appeal
from the Superior Court’s March 20, 2020 order denying his motion for correction
of an illegal sentence and the Superior Court’s April 21, 2020 order denying his
motion for appointment of counsel. The Senior Clerk docketed the two appeals and
issued a notice directing Hall to show cause why his appeal of the Superior Court’s
April 21, 2020 order denying his motion for appointment of counsel should not be
dismissed because this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a criminal interlocutory
appeal. 1
(2) On June 26, 2020, Hall filed a response to the notice to show cause,
arguing that the Superior Court’s order denying his motion for appointment of
counsel is a final order. The State, at the Court’s request, has replied and clarified
that Hall filed the motion for appointment of counsel in connection with a motion
for postconviction relief. Although the Superior Court denied Hall’s motion for
appointment of counsel by way of its April 21, 2020 order, Hall’s motion for
postconviction relief remains pending in the Superior Court.
(3) This Court lacks jurisdiction to review interlocutory rulings of the
Superior Court in a pending criminal case prior to the entry of a final order.2 Because
the Superior Court’s April 21, 2020 order denying Hall’s motion for appointment of
counsel is an interlocutory order, it is not appealable before the entry of a final order
on Hall’s motion for postconviction relief. 3
1
Hall’s appeal from the Superior Court’s denial of his motion for correction of an illegal sentence
is Case No. 195, 2020.
2
Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b); Rash v. State, 318 A.2d 603, 604 (Del. 1974).
3
Harris v. State, 2013 WL 4858990, at *1 (Del. Sept. 10, 2013).
2
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court
Rule 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Tamika R. Montgomery-Reeves
Justice
3