In Brittingham v. State, 705 A.2d 577, 578 (Del. 1998), the Supreme Court of Delaware considered a consolidated appeal from the denial of two motions to correct an illegal sentence under Delaware Rule 35(a), which "permits the Superior Court to correct an illegal sentence 'at any time.'" Brittingham's sentence and conviction previously had been affirmed on appeal. His motion for post-conviction relief had been denied and that denial had been upheld on appeal. See id. The Brittingham Court held that Brittingham's complaints were outside the purview of Rule 35(a) because they involved the validity of prior convictions. It also recognized, however, that the law of the case doctrine "bars relitigation, under Rule 35(a), of an 'illegal sentence' where that issue has been previously decided by this Court." Id. at 579.