Sanchez v. State

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

KWAMEY SANCHEZ, §
§
Defendant Below, § No. 137, 2024
Appellant, §
§ Court Below: Superior Court
v. § of the State of Delaware
§
STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID Nos. N1903002433 &
§ N2104016130
Appellee. §

Submitted: June 12, 2024
Decided: June 18, 2024

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; LEGROW and GRIFFITHS, Justices.

ORDER

(1) The appellant filed this appeal from a Superior Court order sentencing

him for a violation of probation. The Senior Court Clerk sent the appellant a letter

directing him to pay the filing fee or to file a motion and affidavit to proceed in

forma pauperis by April 17, 2024, and enclosed the in forma pauperis form. On

April 19, 2024, the Chief Deputy Clerk sent another letter directing the appellant to

either file a motion and affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee

by May 3, 2024, or a notice to show cause would issue. The Chief Deputy Clerk

again enclosed the applicable form.

(2) On May 9, 2024, the Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice, sent by

certified mail, directing the appellant to show cause why the Court should not
dismiss the appeal for the appellant’s failure to diligently prosecute the appeal by

either paying the Supreme Court filing fee or moving to proceed in forma pauperis.

In response, the appellant sent a letter apologizing for failing to pay the filing fee

and stating that he was seeking to appeal his sentence; he did not address the option

of moving to proceed without paying the fee. On May 30, 2024, the Senior Court

Clerk sent the appellant a letter that held the notice to show cause in abeyance and

gave the appellant another opportunity to either pay the fee or seek to proceed

without paying the fee and once again enclosed the appropriate form. That letter

informed the appellant that if he did not pay the fee or file the motion by June 12,

2024, the appeal would be dismissed without further notice. Because the appellant

has not paid the filing fee or moved to proceed in forma pauperis, the appeal must

be dismissed.1

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),

that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ N. Christopher Griffiths
Justice

1
See Owens v. State, 2018 WL 1747790, at *1 (Del. Apr. 10, 2018) (ORDER) (“In his response
to the notice to show cause, Owens describes the delays in his filing of a motion to proceed in
forma pauperis and states that he still would like to proceed with filing a motion to proceed in
forma pauperis. Owens did not include a motion to proceed in forma pauperis with his [response
to the] notice to show cause and still has not filed one. In light of Owens’ failure to pay the filing
fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, this appeal must be dismissed.”).

2