Cherricks v. State

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s judgment revoking Roberto Cherricks’s probation and imposing additional Level V incarceration. The Court held that Cherricks’s admission to probation violations provided sufficient evidence, rejected his conflict-of-interest argument, and concluded that the sentence was within statutory limits and supported by the record. The Court also upheld the condition requiring service of Level V time without early release under 11 Del. C. § 4204(k).

Holdings

1. A probation violation may be established by a preponderance of the evidence, and Cherricks's admission that he violated probation was sufficient competent evidence to justify revocation.
2. Cherricks failed to establish a conflict of interest because the record showed that his probation officer was different from the TASC officer who testified.
3. The sentence was affirmed because it was within statutory limits and Cherricks did not show that it was based on false, impermissible, or unreliable factual predicates or resulted from vindictiveness, bias, or a closed judicial mind.
4. The Superior Court did not commit reversible error by requiring Cherricks to serve the specified Level V time without the benefit of early release under 11 Del. C. § 4204(k).

Questions Presented

1. Whether Cherricks's admission and other evidence sufficiently established a violation of probation.
2. Whether assigning Cherricks the same probation officer and TASC officer created a conflict of interest.
3. Whether the Superior Court imposed an excessive or otherwise improper violation-of-probation sentence.
4. Whether the Superior Court committed reversible error by imposing a sentencing condition under 11 Del. C. § 4204(k) without providing an adequate reason.

Disposition

affirmed