Warrington v. State, 2204004039

Harold D. Warrington was arrested on April 8, 2022, for multiple traffic-related offenses, including a seventh DUI offense.
He pleaded guilty to one count of Driving Under the Influence as a result of a plea agreement; all other charges were dropped.
On January 13, 2023, he was sentenced to 15 years’ incarceration (suspended after 5 years), required to complete a treatment program, and to undergo alcohol monitoring upon reentry.
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed his conviction on July 27, 2023, finding no meritorious appealable issues.
Warrington filed a timely pro se motion for postconviction relief under Rule 61, asserting claims of newly discovered evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and insufficient evidence, and requested appointed counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Newly Discovered Evidence	Diabetes can cause inaccurate blood alcohol readings, and recent medical evidence.	Medical evidence and diagnosis were already disclosed to defense before plea.	Not newly discovered; claim denied.
Ineffective Assistance	Counsel failed to investigate, review reports, or properly advise on plea.	Counsel reviewed all reports, negotiated plea, and informed defendant’s rights.	No deficient performance; claim denied.
Insufficient Evidence	No sufficient evidence of control of the vehicle for DUI conviction.	Police and plea records show control and admission to driving under influence.	Sufficient evidence; claim denied.
Appointment of Counsel	Requested for help amending and pursuing Rule 61 motion.	Only granted if substantial ineffective assistance claim is present.	No substantial claim; appointment denied.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Strickland standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Albury v. State, 551 A.2d 53 (Del. 1988) (Delaware adoption of Strickland standard for postconviction relief)