Full Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE GEORGE CURTIS, § § Defendant Below, § No. 266, 2026 Appellant, § § Court Below—Superior Court v. § of the State of Delaware § STATE OF DELAWARE, § Cr. ID Nos. 2012010059 and § 2101003496 (K) Appellee. § Submitted: September 14, 2026 Decided: September 28, 2026 Before TRAYNOR, LEGROW, and GRIFFITHS, Justices. ORDER After consideration of the notice to show cause and the response, it appears to the Court that: (1) The appellant, George Curtis, filed this appeal from a Superior Court order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Curtis has not yet been sentenced. The Chief Deputy Clerk issued a notice directing Curtis to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed based on the Court’s lack of jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal in a criminal matter. (2) In his response to the notice to show cause, George argues the merits of his plea withdrawal motion and asks this Court to review the Superior Court’s decision denying the motion. He does not address the jurisdictional issue. (3) Under the Delaware Constitution, this Court may review only a final judgment in a criminal case.1 The Superior Court’s denial of Curtis’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea is not final until Curtis is sentenced.2 The Court therefore does not have jurisdiction to review this appeal. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is DISMISSED under Supreme Court Rule 29(b). BY THE COURT: /s/ Abigail M. LeGrow Justice 1 Del. Const. art. IV, § 11(1)(b); Mujica v. State, 239 A.3d 390, 2020 WL 5870109, at *1 (Del. Oct. 1, 2020) (TABLE). 2 Webb v. State, 281 a.3D 29, 2022 WL 2659667, at *1 (Del. July 8, 2022) (table) (dismissing the defendant’s appeal of the jury’s verdict because he had not yet been sentenced). 2