No. 18-9394

Ward T. Evans v. Delaware

Lower Court: Delaware
Docketed: 2019-05-23
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-challenge constitutionality-of-statute criminal-law criminal-offenses criminal-procedure criminal-statute double-jeopardy due-process in-forma-pauperis indictment indictment-counts statutory-interpretation three-strike-rule three-strikes-law
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Securities Privacy
Latest Conference: 2019-06-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Delaware's 11 Del. Crim. C. sec. 773(2) defines three distinct criminal offenses

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED (1) Whether Delaware’s 11 Del. Crim. C. sec. 773(2) as it was written when Petitioner was charged and convicted , define three distinct and separate criminal offenses by specification of distinct elements albeit a violation of the same statute. : If the answer is yes, was the state required to charge each by specification in separate counts in the indictment in order to charge a criminal offense. (2) Can the State of Delaware use the three strike Rule, or a State bar to deny (a) a prisoners application to proceed in forma pauperis; and (b) a hearing on the merits when the error is plain “or” the issue concerns the constitutionality of a statute. i

Docket Entries

2019-06-24
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2019.
2019-05-28
Waiver of right of respondent State of Delaware to respond filed.
2019-05-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 24, 2019)

Attorneys

State of Delaware
Maria Teresa KnollOffice of the Attorney GeneralState of Delaware,, Respondent
Maria Teresa KnollOffice of the Attorney GeneralState of Delaware,, Respondent
Ward T. Evans
Ward T. Evans — Petitioner
Ward T. Evans — Petitioner