THE CASE: Deonta Carney v. State of Delaware

THE UNDERLYING ISSUE: Criminal

THE ARGUMENT: The trial court’s denial to withdraw a guilty plea was incorrect, as the test case for these issues favored withdrawal.

THE SUMMARY: Deonta Carney was charged under three indictments and accepted a plea bargain in July 2021, with one of those charges, possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, carrying a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years. Before sentencing, he filed a request to withdraw his guilty plea based on ineffectiveness of counsel and claims of innocence of the firearms charge. The defendant argues it was an accomplice who possessed the weapon, a statement supported by the lead detective’s report, which cataloged the only eyewitness statement at the time of the incident — the victim’s. The state maintains that Mr. Carney’s actions at the time meet the requirements of firearm possession, including issuing an order to use the weapon, though the order was ultimately not followed.

THE SOURCE: courts.delaware.gov/supreme/oralarguments/download.aspx?id=4831.

THE CASE: Dr. Richard Baldwin v. New Wood Resources LLC

THE UNDERLYING ISSUE: Civil

THE ARGUMENT: The Superior Court made a mistake when it determined as a matter of law that New Wood LLC acted in good faith and Dr. Baldwin acted in bad faith during a dispute over legal fees.

THE SUMMARY: The two parties are embroiled in a long-standing legal fight over many interconnected issues. Through a variety of agreements, the parties had a contract concerning legal fees if a dispute emerged, which it did. New Wood claims Dr. Baldwin acted in bad faith in seeking reimbursement of these fees, while Dr. Baldwin maintains New Wood acted in bad faith by determining, after the fact, that he had acted in bad faith.

THE SOURCE: courts.delaware.gov/supreme/oralarguments/download.aspx?id=4854.