Garvin v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed the denial of Garvin’s first postconviction-relief motion and granted the State’s motion to affirm. It held that Garvin failed to establish ineffective assistance because the record contradicted his coercion claim, counsel’s advice and sentencing representation were not deficient, and he alleged no concrete prejudice from the claimed investigative or communication failures. The Court also held that his knowing and voluntary guilty plea barred his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.