Pennington v. State

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s denial of David Pennington’s motion for postconviction relief following his guilty pleas and sentences for dealing in and possessing child pornography. Applying Supreme Court Rule 26(c), the Court found the appeal wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable issue, and deemed appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw moot.

Holdings

1. Counsel may withdraw when counsel has conscientiously examined the record and law for arguable claims, provided the defendant with the motion and supporting brief and an opportunity to identify issues, and the Supreme Court independently determines that the appeal is wholly devoid of at least arguably appealable issues.
2. Pennington's appeal was wholly without merit and devoid of any arguably appealable issue; the Superior Court's denial of postconviction relief was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether appointed postconviction counsel satisfied the requirements for withdrawal under Delaware Superior Court Criminal Rule 61(e)(2) and Supreme Court Rule 26(c).
2. Whether Pennington's postconviction appeal presented any arguably appealable or meritorious issue, including his claims of vindictive prosecution, improper sentence enhancement, lack of benefit from the plea agreement, and ineffective assistance of counsel.

Disposition

affirmed