State v. Dillard
1105015873
Del. Super. Ct.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Dante Dillard was convicted in 2012 after pleading guilty to multiple felonies, including two counts of first-degree murder, resulting in two life sentences and 85 additional years.
- Dillard did not appeal his convictions or sentence at the time.
- He later filed three postconviction relief motions (2022, 2023, and 2025), all after the one-year deadline allowed by Delaware Superior Court Criminal Rule 61.
- Previous postconviction relief motions were denied or dismissed as untimely and successive, meaning they did not present new evidence or claims of actual innocence or changes in constitutional law.
- In his latest motion, Dillard also requested appointment of counsel and claimed ineffective assistance for not pursuing a "guilty but mentally ill" plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appointment of Postconviction Counsel | Dillard requests counsel for latest motion. | Appointment only if standards in Rule 61(d)(2) are satisfied. | Denied because Dillard pled guilty (not convicted after trial) and did not meet Rule 61(d)(2) standards. |
| Timeliness of Postconviction Motion | Dillard claims an exception to procedural bars under Rule 61(i)(3) “cause and prejudice”. | State argues bars are absolute unless exceptions (actual innocence/new law) are met. | Motion dismissed as untimely; cause and prejudice do not apply to time/successiveness bars. |
| Successive Motion Bar | Dillard asserts grounds for review regardless of prior motions. | State argues only new evidence or new law can justify consideration. | Summarily dismissed; Dillard does not plead new evidence or new constitutional rule. |
| Ineffective Assistance of Counsel | Dillard alleges counsel failed to pursue a ‘guilty but mentally ill’ plea. | State counters such a plea yields same sentence and no prejudice shown. | No prejudice; claim fails Strickland standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- MacDonald v. State, 778 A.2d 1064 (Del. 2001) (sets the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel in guilty plea context)
- Somerville v. State, 703 A.2d 629 (Del. 1997) (affirms two-part Strickland test for postconviction relief)
- Younger v. State, 580 A.2d 552 (Del. 1990) (procedural bars must be addressed before merits in postconviction motions)
- Sanders v. State, 585 A.2d 117 (Del. 1990) (explains sentencing impact of guilty but mentally ill pleas)