Legal Case

State v. Hayman-Cooper

Hayman-Cooper

Court

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided

June 27, 2025

Jurisdiction

SA

Importance

42%

Significant

Case Summary

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE STATE OF DELAWARE, ) ) v. ) ID Nos. 2106007748 & ) 2207010076 NA-ZER HAYMAN-COOPER, ) Defendant. ) Submitted: March 24, 2025 Decided: June 27, 2025 Upon Defendant Na-Zer Hayman-Cooper’s Motion for Postconviction Relief, DENIED. ORDER This 27th day of June, 2025, upon consideration of the Defendant’s Motion for Postconviction Relief (D.I. 57)1, the State’s response (D.I. 72), the Defendant’s reply (D.I. 75), and the record in this matter, it appears to the Court that: (1) In September 2021, Na-Zer Hayman-Cooper was indicted for multiple crimes in Case Nos. 2106007748 (which arose from a shooting in June 2021 that paralyzed the victim), 2106008755 (which arose from the theft of a cell phone in May 2021), and 210600838 (which arose from the theft of a gun in June 2021). In August 2022, Mr. Hayman-Cooper was indicted in Case No. 2207010076 for tampering with a witness (the shooting victim in Case No. 2106007748). 1 To avoid confusion, all docket references are to those made in Case ID No. 2106007748. -1- (2) On March 13, 2023, Mr. Hayman-Cooper resolved all of these cases by pleading guilty to first-degree assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony (PFDCF) from Case No. 2106007748 and the witness tampering count from Case No. 2207010076.2 He did so in exchange for the State’s dismissal of the remaining indicted counts from each of his then-pending cases.3 (3) Mr. Hayman-Cooper’s sentencing occurred on June 2, 2023, after a comprehensive presentence investigative (PSI) report was prepared. In addition to those materials compiled in that PSI report, the parties filed their own supplemental sentencing memoranda.4 (4) He was sentenced as follows: (a) for Assault First Degree (IN21-07- 1139)—25 years at supervision Level V suspended after 7 years for diminishing levels of supervision; (b) for PFDCF (IN21-07-1140)—25 years at supervision Level V suspended after 3 years for diminishing levels of supervision; and (c) for Tampering With a Witness (IN22-03-2061)—6 months at supervision Level V to be served under the provisions of 11 Del. C. § 4204(k) with no probation to follow.5 (5) Mr. Hayman-Cooper’s 10½-year period of unsuspended imprisonment is comprised, in part, of two separate minimum terms of incarceration that must be 2 D.I. 35 (Plea Agreement and TIS Guilty Plea Form). 3 Plea Agreement at 1. 4 D.I. 36 and 37. 5 D.I. 38 (Sentencing Order). -2- imposed under a combination of Delaware’s first-degree assault and PFDCF statutes; those two separate minimum terms total 5 years.6 The remaining 5½ years the Court imposed as an exercise of its own sentencing judgment. (6) At the time of sentencing, the Court noted the aggravating and mitigating circumstances it found: To the extent this sentence might exceed any applicable SENTAC guidelines (including the application of 11 Del. C. sec. 4204(k)), the Court finds the following aggravating factors inform such departure: (1) the Defendant took affirmative steps to dissuade or prevent victim and witness cooperation in his prosecution; (2) the Defendant has demonstrated a lack of amenability to lesser sanctions and repeated lack of respect for the mandates of the courts; and (3) any lesser sentence would unduly depreciate the devastating and permanent physical injury and disability the Defendant inflicted on the victim, J--- S---. All that noted, the Court does also recognize the demonstrated and unaddressed mental health issues Mr. Hayman-Cooper obviously has and that no doubt are a product of his chaotic childhood and the deprivations then suffered.7 6 See DEL. CODE ANN. tit. 11, §§ 613, 1447A, and 4205(b) (2020) (first-degree assault is a class B violent felony carrying a statutory minimum of two years at Level V; PFDCF carries a statutory minimum of three years at Level V). 7 Sentencing Order at 4; Sentencing Transcript at 13-16 (D.I. 44) (the Court articulates the applicable sentencing guidelines, these same aggravators and mitigators, and its reasons for application of or departure from certain of the guidelines). See DEL. CODE ANN. tit. 11, § 4204(n) (2020) (“Whenever a court imposes a sentence inconsistent with the presumptive sentences adopted by the Sentencing Accountability Commission, such court shall set forth on the record it

NEW FEATURE

Agentic Research

Unlock the power of AI-driven legal research. Our advanced agentic system autonomously analyzes cases, identifies patterns, and delivers comprehensive insights in minutes, not hours.

AI-Powered Analysis
Precise Legal Research
10x Faster Results

Join 2,500+ legal professionals

Case Details

Case Details

Legal case information

Status

Decided

Date Decided

June 27, 2025

Jurisdiction

SA

Court Type

district

Legal Significance

Case importance metrics

Importance Score
Significant
Score42%
Citations
0

Metadata

Additional information

AddedJun 27, 2025
UpdatedJun 27, 2025

Quick Actions

Case management tools

AI-enhanced legal analysis

Case Summary

Summary of the key points and legal principles

Case Information

Detailed case metadata and classifications

Court Proceedings

Date FiledJune 27, 2025
Date DecidedJune 27, 2025

Document Details

Times Cited
0
Importance Score
0.4

Legal Classification

JurisdictionSA
Court Type
district
Judicial Panel
Wallace J.
Opinion Author
Wallace J.