Garvey v. State

979 A.2d 1110 (Del. 2009) · Supreme Court of Delaware · September 10, 2009 · No. No. 235, 2009

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Robert Garvey's third motion for postconviction relief. The court held that his challenge to the felony-murder jury instruction was procedurally barred as previously adjudicated and under res judicata, and that the appeal was without merit under settled Delaware law.

Court
Supreme Court of Delaware
Writing for the Court
Randy J. Holland, Justice; Steele, Chief Justice; Holland, Justice; Berger, Justice
Jurisdiction
Delaware
Decision date
September 10, 2009
Docket number
No. 235, 2009
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Superior Court's denial of Garvey's third motion for postconviction relief; the State moved to affirm under Delaware Supreme Court Rule 25(a).
Standard of review
Under Supreme Court Rule 25(a), affirmance was appropriate because it was manifest on the face of the opening brief that the appeal was without merit. The court reviewed the postconviction ruling for abuse of discretion to the extent discretion was implicated and applied procedural-bar and res judicata principles.
Precedential value
Published Delaware Supreme Court opinion
Parties
Robert Garvey v. State of Delaware
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

state post-conviction reliefsuccessive petitionsappellate procedurecriminal procedurestatutory interpretation

Practice areas

state post-conviction reliefcriminal procedureappellate procedurestatutory interpretation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Garvey's challenge to the felony-murder jury instruction was procedurally barred as previously adjudicated.
  2. Whether the same challenge was barred by res judicata because the Delaware Supreme Court had previously determined that the instruction was proper.
  3. Whether the Superior Court abused its discretion in denying the third postconviction motion or should have conducted an evidentiary hearing.

Holdings

  1. Garvey's claim that the jury instruction amended the indictment and deprived him of adequate notice was procedurally barred because it had already been raised and rejected in his earlier postconviction litigation; recasting the claim as an indictment challenge did not make it sufficiently different.
  2. Res judicata barred Garvey's claim because the same issue involving the same parties had previously been adjudicated, and the Supreme Court had already determined that the Superior Court properly instructed the jury regarding the statutory language.
  3. The Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in denying Garvey's postconviction motion, and no evidentiary hearing was warranted because the record contained no evidence supporting one.

Factual background

In October 2003, Garvey was convicted of first-degree murder, robbery, attempted robbery, multiple firearm and concealed-weapon offenses, and second-degree conspiracy. He received a life sentence without probation or parole for murder. His latest postconviction motion challenged a jury instruction concerning the felony-murder statute's "in furtherance of" language and argued that the instruction amended the indictment and provided inadequate notice.

Procedural history

Garvey was convicted in the Superior Court of multiple offenses, including first-degree murder, and received a life sentence without probation or parole on the murder conviction. The Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct appeal and affirmed the denials of two earlier postconviction motions. The Superior Court denied Garvey's third postconviction motion, and the Supreme Court affirmed that judgment and granted the State's motion to affirm.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…