[Download] "David R. Distefano and James Stewart v." by Supreme Court of Delaware " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: David R. Distefano and James Stewart v.
- Author : Supreme Court of Delaware
- Release Date : January 11, 1989
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 68 KB
Description
HOLLAND, Justice This is an appeal from the entry of a final order by the Superior Court, in and for New Castle County. The
plaintiffs-appellants, David R. DiStefano ("DiStefano") and James Stewart ("Stewart"), both of whom are prisoners at the Delaware
Correctional Center, filed a civil petition for a writ of mandamus and declaratory relief. Their complaint challenged the
validity, scope, and application to them of the February 21, 1986 amendment to 11 Del.C. § 6537, codified as a new
subsection (b) of that statute. That amendment limited the authority of the Department of Correction to permit certain prisoners,
including DiStefano and Stewart, to participate in any program or to engage in any visitation beyond the confines of a secured
penal institution. The defendant-appellee, Robert J. Watson, Commissioner of the Delaware Department of Correction ("Watson"),
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Superior Court
granted Watson's motion, which it treated as a motion for summary judgment. DiStefano and Stewart have appealed from the Superior Court's decision on the following grounds: (1) the General Assembly
did not intend 11 Del.C. § 6537(b) to operate retrospectively; (2) the General Assembly did not intend the provisions
of 11 Del.C. § 6537(b) to apply to persons who are eligible for parole or conditional release in less than 10 years;
(3) the application of 11 Del.C. § 6537(b) to them would violate the ex post facto prohibition of the United States
Constitution; and (4) the application of 11 Del.C. § 6537(b) to them would violate the substantive due process guarantees
of both the United States Constitution and the Delaware Constitution. We have concluded that none of the claims raised by
DiStefano and Stewart are meritorious.