From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shah v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Feb 23, 2012
No. 648, 2011 (Del. Feb. 23, 2012)

Opinion

No. 648, 2011

02-23-2012

KUSHAL SHAH a k a GERRON LINDSEY, Defendant, Appellant, v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff, Appellee.


Court-Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County


Cr. ID No. 0002019767

Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.

ORDER

This 23rd day of February 2012, after careful consideration of the opening brief filed by the appellant, Kushal Shah a k a Gerron Lindsey (hereinafter "Shah"), and the motion to affirm filed by the appellee, State of Delaware, we conclude that the judgment on appeal should be affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court's November 18, 2011 order, which accepted, after de novo review and consideration of Shah's objections, the Commissioner's report and recommendation dated June 22, 2011. The Superior Court did not err when determining that the substantive claims raised in Shah's seventh motion for postconviction relief were without merit because they were considered in Shah's direct appeal, six prior postconviction motions, and/or the Commissioner's report and recommendation.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the State's motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

Henry duPont Ridgely

Justice


Summaries of

Shah v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Feb 23, 2012
No. 648, 2011 (Del. Feb. 23, 2012)
Case details for

Shah v. State

Case Details

Full title:KUSHAL SHAH a k a GERRON LINDSEY, Defendant, Appellant, v. STATE OF…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Date published: Feb 23, 2012

Citations

No. 648, 2011 (Del. Feb. 23, 2012)

Citing Cases

Shah v. Danberg

Shah, 29 A.3d at 246. Since then, plaintiff has filed, unsuccessfully, seven motions for postconviction…