Summary
The Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed the denial of Dwayne Cropper’s motion to correct an allegedly illegal sentence under Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(a). The court held that his sentence was within the statutory range and that Delaware’s voluntary, nonbinding sentencing guidelines did not implicate the constitutional principles discussed in Apprendi, Blakely, and Cunningham.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Cropper's attempted-murder sentence was illegal because it exceeded Delaware's SENTAC sentencing guidelines.
- Whether Apprendi v. New Jersey, Blakely v. Washington, and Cunningham v. California required correction of the sentence despite its compliance with the statutory sentencing range.
- Whether the Superior Court properly denied Cropper's motion to correct an illegal sentence under Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(a).
Holdings
- A criminal sentence that falls within the statutory range is not illegal merely because it exceeds Delaware's voluntary and nonbinding sentencing guidelines.
- Apprendi, Blakely, and Cunningham did not affect the outcome because Delaware's sentencing guidelines are voluntary and nonbinding and Cropper's sentence was within the statutory range.
Key quotations
“In Delaware the appellate review of a criminal sentence is limited, with few exceptions, to a determination that the sentence is within the statutory limits.” (929 A.2d at 783)
“The cases cited Cropper does not affect the outcome of his case, given the voluntary and non-binding nature of Delaware's sentencing guidelines.” (929 A.2d at 783)
Factual background
In February 1999, a Superior Court jury found Cropper guilty of attempted murder in the first degree and possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a felony. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to 35 years' imprisonment followed by 10 years of decreasing levels of supervision. Cropper challenged his attempted-murder sentence because it exceeded Delaware's SENTAC sentencing guidelines, although he conceded that the sentence was within the statutory range.
Procedural history
Cropper was convicted in the Superior Court of Delaware and sentenced as a habitual offender to an aggregate term of 35 years' imprisonment followed by 10 years of decreasing levels of supervision. His convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal, and subsequent postconviction motions were unsuccessful. The Superior Court denied his Rule 35(a) motion, and the Delaware Supreme Court granted the State's motion to affirm and affirmed the judgment.