Currently, if a child’s criminal case is transferred by the Family Court to Superior Court, or if a child files an application in Superior Court to have their criminal case transferred to Family Court and the Superior Court denies the application, there is no recourse for appeal until the child’s criminal case is finally adjudicated in Superior Court. In State v. Roberts, Del.Supr. 282 A.2nd 603 (1971) the Delaware Supreme Court stated its jurisdiction over such appeals by an accused, may only be by operation of law. This Act permits the child to enter a plea of guilty or nolo contendere and appeal an amenability denial to the Delaware Supreme Court within 30 days of being sentenced by the Superior Court. This Act also prohibits any plea being conditioned on waiving this right of appeal. This Act also clarifies that the Superior Court will not retain jurisdiction over the child if the Supreme Court reverses the Superior Court’s Order. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform with H.B. 115 of the 151st General Assembly, which was enacted into law on November 8, 2021 and prohibited transfers to Superior Court for children under the age of 16 in all but the most serious offenses.
This Act adds intentional interference with the operation of a school bus to the offense of disorderly conduct. Intentional interference with a school bus may include boarding a school bus and refusing to exit after being lawfully ordered to do so by the school bus driver; wrongfully restricting the movement of a school bus; or threatening the school bus driver, a student, or any passenger entering, leaving, or waiting for a school bus. A student or passenger otherwise authorized to be on the school bus in the ordinary course of business may not be guilty of disorderly conduct for intentional interference with the operation of a school bus. This Act requires a greater than majority vote for passage because § 28 of Article IV of the Delaware Constitution requires the affirmative vote of 2/3 of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to expand the scope of an existing crime within the jurisdiction of an inferior court.
This Act updates Title 11 of the Delaware Code concerning postconviction remedies relating to DNA testing and evidence. Specifically, the Act removes the limitations currently in the Delaware Code (1) that a person convicted of a crime must seek DNA testing within 3 years after the conviction is final and (2) that a person convicted of a crime may not seek DNA testing or a new trial based on DNA evidence if direct appellate review is available. In addition, the Act requires the court to grant a motion for the performance of DNA testing if certain criteria are satisfied. The Act also permits persons who entered a guilty plea, in addition to persons convicted of a crime, to seek DNA testing, and allows for DNA testing where evidence was previously subjected to testing but additional testing of that evidence provides a reasonable likelihood of results that are more probative. The Act changes the standard applicable for a motion for a new trial based on DNA evidence. Instead of requiring a showing by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable trier of fact would have convicted the person, the under the Act, the court must grant a new trial up a showing of a reasonable probability that there would have been a different outcome or no conviction, had the DNA evidence been presented before or during trial or before the date of entry of a plea. Finally, the Act makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual. This Act is a substitute for and differs from Senate Bill 57 in that it clarifies that the DNA testing may be performed on evidence secured in relation to the investigation, and is not limited to evidence secured in relation to the trial. In addition, this Act removes a requirement that the movant show that the evidence was not previously subject to testing because the technology for testing was not available at the time of trial. Finally, this Act requires the court to grant a new trial if the standard is satisfied, rather than leaving it to the court's discretion.
In Cornette v. State, 2024 Del. Super. Lexis 455 (June 11, 2024), the Superior Court denied a discretionary expungement because the applicant’s case included a Title 21 conviction. The Court held: “Pursuant to 11 Del. C. § 4372, in order for the Court to grant expungement the entire case must be eligible for expungement. This means that all charges within one case must be expungable. The Court will not split convictions and expunge a conviction in one case where the other charges within the same case are not expungable.” This Act makes all of the following clear: (1) The General Assembly’s intent in enacting some of the recent changes to Delaware’s expungement laws was to make clear that Title 21 offenses do not operate as a bar to an individual seeking, or a court or the State Bureau of Identification granting, a discretionary or mandatory expungement, even if the Title 21 offenses are combined in the same case with other offenses that are eligible for expungement. (2) A civil violation is not a bar to an individual seeking, or a court or the State Bureau of Identification granting, a discretionary or mandatory expungement, even if the civil violation is combined in the same case with other offenses that are eligible for expungement. (3) The definition of “case” does not include a Title 21 offense, or an equivalent offense, or a civil violation that is or could be joined for prosecution with another charge or set of charges related to a complaint or incident. Therefore, a court or the State Bureau of Identification may not deny a request for a discretionary or mandatory expungement under this subchapter because the set of charges for which the discretionary or mandatory expungement is sought includes a conviction of a Title 21 offense, or an equivalent offense, or a finding of, or agreement to, responsibility for a civil violation. (4) Driving after judgment prohibited, reckless driving, and operation of a motor vehicle causing death are not eligible for discretionary expungement as they are not reported on certified criminal histories. (5) References to Title 21 offenses include an offense under any county or municipal code, ordinance, or regulation which is the same as, or equivalent to, any offense under Title 21 of the Delaware Code.
HB 150 prohibits civil arrests from occurring inside Delaware courthouses without a judicial warrant. This directly affects courthouse staff, law enforcement, and individuals entering courthouses, as it requires a court-issued warrant for any civil arrest (like those for unpaid debts or civil contempt) within courthouse grounds. The key provision amends Delaware law to mandate this warrant requirement, replacing the previous practice that allowed such arrests without court oversight in these locations.
