Petition of Wittrock, No. 401
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Delaware |
| Writing for the Court | Before VEASEY; HOLLAND |
| Citation | 649 A.2d 1053 |
| Parties | In The Matter of The Petition of Joseph A. WITTROCK for A Writ of Prohibition. . Submitted: |
| Decision Date | 25 October 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 401,1994 |
Page 1053
Writ of Prohibition.
Decided: Nov. 21, 1994.
Upon Petition for Extraordinary Writ. DISMISSED.
Joseph A. Wittrock, pro se.
Richard E. Fairbanks, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., Wilmington, for respondent.
Before VEASEY, C.J., HOLLAND, and BERGER, JJ.
HOLLAND, Justice:
In March 1992, a Superior Court jury convicted the petitioner, Joseph A. Wittrock ("Wittrock"), of numerous sexual offenses. This Court affirmed Wittrock's convictions on direct appeal. On September 30, 1994, Wittrock filed his first motion for postconviction
Page 1054
relief in the Superior Court. Super.Ct.Crim.R. 61. That motion was assigned for disposition to the judge who had presided over Wittrock's trial. Wittrock did not request the trial judge to recuse himself from considering Wittrock's postconviction motion.Wittrock has applied to this Court for a writ of prohibition. As grounds for the petition, Wittrock contends that the trial judge exhibited bias and prejudice at his trial. Thus, he seeks to prevent the trial judge from ruling on his postconviction motion.
According to Wittrock, the trial judge erred by failing to declare a mistrial sua sponte, after becoming aware that Wittrock's attorney had an alleged material conflict of interest. Wittrock has raised that alleged error as one ground for relief in his postconviction motion. Wittrock contends that the trial judge's failure to declare a mistrial exhibits bias and demonstrates an inability to rule impartially on Wittrock's postconviction motion. The State has filed a motion to dismiss Wittrock's petition for a writ of prohibition.
Every litigant is entitled to be heard by a disinterested judge. Matushefske v. Herlihy, Del.Supr., 214 A.2d 883, 886 (1965). This Court, therefore, has original jurisdiction to issue a writ of prohibition not only to prevent a lower court from exceeding the limits of its jurisdiction, but to restrain an individual judge from proceeding in a case in which the judge is clearly disqualified by reason of personal interest, bias or prejudice. Supr.Ct.R. 43; In re Hovey, Del.Supr., 545 A.2d 626, 628 (1988); Matushefske v. Herlihy, 214 A.2d at 886. When this Court's original jurisdiction to issue an extraordinary writ is invoked, the burden is upon the petitioner to demonstrate a clear entitlement to that relief. In re Hovey, 545 A.2d at 629.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gattis v. State, No. 628, 2005.
...575 (1998). 41. Jones, 940 A.2d at 19. 42. State v. Gattis, 2005 WL 3276191, at *20 (Del.Super.). 43. See generally Petition of Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054 (Del.1994) ("[A] trial judge's rulings alone almost never constitute a valid per se basis for disqualification on the ground of 44. F......
-
State v. Charbonneau, Def. ID# 0207003810 (Del. Super. 9/8/2006), Def. ID# 0207003810.
...judge has made adverse rulings during the course of a proceeding. State v. Manley, 2004 WL 2419138 (Del. Super), citing In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054, (citing Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, (1994)); Weber v. State, 547 A.2d 948 (Del. 1988); and Baxter v. State, 788 A.2d 130 (D......
-
State Of Del. v. Desmond, I.D. No. 91009844DI
...with threatening the presiding Superior Court judge, even if the judge was aware of the charges.)). 111. See, e.g., In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054 (Del. 1994); Gattis v. State, 955 A.2d 1276, 1286 (Del. 2008) ("Judicial rulings alone, such as the denial of a motion to recuse or disqual......
-
State v. Manley, IN-95-11-1323 thru IN-95-11-1325 & IN-95-12-0684 thru IN-95-12-0685 (DE 10/18/2004), IN-95-11-1323 thru IN-95-11-1325 & IN-95-12-0684 thru IN-95-12-0685.
...540, 541 114 S. Ct. 1147, 1150, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994). 27. Dickens v. Costello, 2004 WL 1731136 at *2 (Del. Super). 28. In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054, citing Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 114 S. Ct. 1147, 1157, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994). 29. Baxter v. State, 2002 WL 27435 (Del.......
-
Gattis v. State, No. 628, 2005.
...575 (1998). 41. Jones, 940 A.2d at 19. 42. State v. Gattis, 2005 WL 3276191, at *20 (Del.Super.). 43. See generally Petition of Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054 (Del.1994) ("[A] trial judge's rulings alone almost never constitute a valid per se basis for disqualification on the ground of 44. F......
-
State v. Charbonneau, Def. ID# 0207003810 (Del. Super. 9/8/2006), Def. ID# 0207003810.
...judge has made adverse rulings during the course of a proceeding. State v. Manley, 2004 WL 2419138 (Del. Super), citing In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054, (citing Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, (1994)); Weber v. State, 547 A.2d 948 (Del. 1988); and Baxter v. State, 788 A.2d 130 (D......
-
State Of Del. v. Desmond, I.D. No. 91009844DI
...with threatening the presiding Superior Court judge, even if the judge was aware of the charges.)). 111. See, e.g., In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054 (Del. 1994); Gattis v. State, 955 A.2d 1276, 1286 (Del. 2008) ("Judicial rulings alone, such as the denial of a motion to recuse or disqual......
-
State v. Manley, IN-95-11-1323 thru IN-95-11-1325 & IN-95-12-0684 thru IN-95-12-0685 (DE 10/18/2004), IN-95-11-1323 thru IN-95-11-1325 & IN-95-12-0684 thru IN-95-12-0685.
...540, 541 114 S. Ct. 1147, 1150, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994). 27. Dickens v. Costello, 2004 WL 1731136 at *2 (Del. Super). 28. In re Wittrock, 649 A.2d 1053, 1054, citing Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 114 S. Ct. 1147, 1157, 127 L.Ed.2d 474 (1994). 29. Baxter v. State, 2002 WL 27435 (Del.......