Justia West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Defendant pleaded guilty to third offense shoplifting. The Circuit Court of Braxton County imposed a sentence of one to ten years of imprisonment, to be served consecutively to a sentence previously imposed in Monongalia County. Thereafter, Defendant filed a motion under W. Va. R. Crim. P. 35(b) seeking to modify his sentence. While that motion was pending, Defendant appealed, arguing that the circuit court erred when it denied his pre-sentencing motion for an alternative sentence. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Defendant’s pending Rule 35(b) motion had no effect on the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction of the final judgment order; and (2) the sentence of imprisonment was not disproportionate for the crime of third offense shoplifting. View "State v. Doom" on Justia Law

Defendant appealed his conviction for second-degree sexual assault and of attempting to commit first-degree sexual abuse. The court found that, under Rule 412 of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence, the circuit court abused its discretion when it prevented defendant from admitting and using text messages from the victim's boyfriend. In this case, the prosecutor opposed admitting the texts, though acknowledging that the victim's reluctance to report the crime, the fact that she discussed it with her boyfriend and the boyfriend pushed her to report the crime, is relevant. The court further concluded that exclusion of the text messages warrants a new trial. Finally, the court concluded that Officer Robertson's testimony as a lay witness was hearsay and irrelevant to the situation at hand. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded. View "West Virginia v. Varlas" on Justia Law

During a 2007 fight, Smith attacked Thomas with a hammer, and, following a struggle over a loaded shotgun, Smith discharged the shotgun into Thomas’s leg. Thomas’s minor son (C.), was present. Smith was convicted of malicious assault involving a hammer, malicious assault involving a firearm, wanton endangerment of C., involving a firearm, and attempted murder, W. Va. Code sections 61-2-9(a), 61-7-12, 61-11-8, 61-2-1. After unsuccessful direct appeal, Smith sought habeas corpus relief, alleging violation of his due process rights and ineffective assistance of counsel. His memorandum of law argued that conviction and sentence for both the malicious assault of Thomas using a firearm and the wanton endangerment of C. involving a firearm placed Smith in double jeopardy. Before filing that memorandum, Smith did not mention the double jeopardy issue in any habeas filings, at trial, at sentencing, or on appeal. The court granted relief on the double jeopardy claim and permitted Smith to choose one of the two offending convictions and its corresponding sentence to be dismissed. He chose malicious assault with a firearm. The state filed an objection. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed; the “same transaction” test may not be used to decide whether prosecution and punishment imposed under two distinct statutory provisions violates double jeopardy principles. View "Mirandy v. Smith" on Justia Law

Painter was convicted, in 2007, of grand larceny, daytime burglary with breaking, petit larceny, two counts of first-degree murder, and possession of a stolen vehicle. His sentence included a prison term of life without mercy and a restitution order amount of about $7,000.00, to “be paid from monies contained within any prison account or any assets of the defendant." Painter began serving his sentence at Mount Olive in Fayette County, and received a Notice of Withholding, stating: Deductions will be based upon 40% of your earnings ... defined as all sums of money paid to an inmate on account of any work assignment, or other allowable means by which an inmate may be compensated for work… Earnings shall further include all sums of money received by the inmate on account of a settlement of a lawsuit, civil judgment, or other lawful process, inheritance, bequest, gift, except funds provided the inmate by family or friends." The warden began deducting 40% of the money Painter received from his family and friends. He unsuccessfully challenged the policy under W. Va. Code 25-1-3c(c)(1). The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, concluding that funds gifted to an inmate by family and friends may be subject to deduction to pay court-ordered restitution. View "Painter v. Ballard" on Justia Law

Streets, a 32-year Berkeley County Sheriff’s Department veteran, was indicted for felony embezzlement and fraudulent schemes, with respect to 13 guns taken from the Department and sold to a gun dealer, Glockcop. He was found not guilty of fraudulent schemes; the jury hung on the embezzlement count. A mistrial was declared. The state filed a notice of intent to use Rule 404(b) evidence, consisting of certified public records of judgments against Streets from lawsuits involving wrongful occupation and defaults on residential rental agreements, a default on a furniture installment agreement, nonpayment of medical bills, wage garnishment and home foreclosure, to establish debt in excess of $38,000. The court determined that the evidence was admissible to show motive, During retrial, the state also presented Glockcop’s business records and testimony that Streets was the sole officer in charge of the evidence room. Streets claimed that he mistakenly sold the guns, thinking that they were guns he had inherited from his father. After a conviction, the court granted a retrial. The Supreme Court of Appeals granted mandamus, finding that the trial court erred by granting a new trial when Streets failed to object to alleged error during trial; in determining that the state improperly attacked Streets’ character, when he first placed his character in issue; and by granting a new trial when the alleged error was harmless. The overwhelming evidence would support the conviction without the state’s closing argument comments implicating character. View "Games-Neely v. Yoder" on Justia Law

In 2004, the Petitioner was charged with sexual abuse in the first degree, attempt to commit a felony of sexual assault in the first degree, sexual assault in the first degree and sexual abuse by a custodian, based on 2001 incidents involving his step-granddaughter. He was convicted in 2005. The court ordered that, following his discharge from the penitentiary after serving a 10-20 year sentence for his sexual abuse by a custodian conviction, he “shall be placed on probation for a period of ten (10) years” with specific conditions. In 2006, the Legislature amended the statute to require a mandatory period of extended supervised release, West Virginia Code 62-12-2631. In 2015, the circuit court modified petitioner’s probationary period to five years followed by 20 years of “intensive supervision as a sex offender.” The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the extension of his sentence, citing the ex post facto clause found in both the West Virginia and United States Constitutions. View "West Virginia v. Deel" on Justia Law

In 2014, Shafer, a drug addict, his girlfriend, Hughes, also addicted to drugs, and their friend, Wilson, conspired to rob 66-year-old Lynch, who lived alone with her dog in St. Albans. They had learned that she had been robbed several times, but had not report edthe robberies because she feared repercussions. Shafer took a toy gun and. Wilson took a kitchen knife; neither wore masks or gloves. When Lynch returned home, found them outside her house, and did not take their threats seriously, they became angry. Inside the house, Wilson stabbed Lynch to death. They took property and later returned with Hughes to steal a car. They repeatedly returned to the house, stealing additional property and allowing the dog to starve to death. A friend discovered Lynch’s decaying body. Shafer agreed to plead guilty to first-degree murder in the commission of the felony offense; conspiracy; three counts of burglary by breaking and entering; and two counts of grand larceny; the state agreed to recommend that the court sentence Shafer to life with mercy for the felony murder and to stand silent on whether his sentences should run consecutively or concurrently. The PSR revealed that as a juvenile, Shafer was charged with breaking and entering; he had other offenses and a long history of drug use. The court imposed, and the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, consecutive sentences, including life in the penitentiary without mercy. View "West Virginia v. Shafer" on Justia Law

In 2013, the petitioner was charged with nine counts involving his minor daughter, M.C., that pertained to three separate incidents of first-degree sexual assault (West Virginia Code 61-8B-3(a)(2)), sexual abuse by a parent (61-8D­ 5(a)), and incest (61-8-12). Two additional counts involved a single incident with A.O., a minor neighbor, and charged first-degree sexual abuse and sexual abuse by a custodian or person in a position of trust (61-8D-5(a)). Before trial, the state, possessing M.C.’s shirt on which semen had been found, unsuccessfully moved to compel a blood or a saliva sample from the petitioner. A month later, the state successfully sought and obtained saliva sample. The state then successfully moved to exclude the introduction of the DNA test results at trial because they eliminated the petitioner as a potential donor of the semen. The state argued the evidence would violate the rape shield law. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to 50-165 years of incarceration. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed as to M.C., based on the exclusion of the DNA evidence. The court upheld the admission of Rule 404(b) evidence (the testimony of four minors) for the purpose of showing the petitioner’s lustful disposition for children and rejected a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to establish that the petitioner was a “custodian” or “person in a position of trust. ” View "West Virginia v. Timothy C." on Justia Law

In 2014, Wilson and Shafer planned to rob Lynch-Burdette at her home , considering her an “easy mark” because she was 66 years old, weighed 100 pounds, lived alone, and had been robbed previously, but had never made a police report. They walked to Lynch-Burdette’s home, Wilson armed with a knife and Shafer with a toy gun, and demanded money and drugs. Enraged at her inability to provide what they wanted, they beat and stabbed Lynch-Burdette to death and ,took property from her home. In the days that followed, Shafer and his girlfriend and possibly Wilson returned to search for more valuables. They wrapped her body in a tarp and left her dog to starve to death. Police discovered the body three weeks later. Wilson entered a plea of guilty to first-degree murder. The state dismissed related charges and agreed to stand silent at sentencing, reserving “the right to cross-examine witnesses offered in mitigation of punishment and to correct any factual inaccuracies.” At sentencing, the state made no recommendation with respect to a recommendation of mercy, but did dispute Wilson’s version of events in certain respects. The cour imposed a sentence of life imprisonment without mercy. Wilson moved to reduce sentence and to void the plea agreement. The court denied the motions, stating that the prosecutor’s statements had not influenced its decision. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed. The state did not breach its agreement to remain silent as to sentencing, there were no improper factors considered in the sentencing decision, and the sentence was within the court’s discretion and justified under the circumstances. View "West Virginia v. Wilson" on Justia Law

In 2013, Siron, “driving around drinking,” was joined by his cousin, Heater, who asked Siron to drive to the Oberg home. Heater did not tell Siron that Oberg was having an affair with Kelli and that Kelli’s husband had agreed to pay Heater $5,000.00 to kill Oberg. They spent time at Oberg’s apartment drinking beer, after which the three went out. Heater directed Siron to drive to a remote spot in Upshur County to smoke marijuana. When Heater and Oberg were out of Siron’s sight, Siron suddenly “saw a bright flash and heard a boom.” He heard Oberg ask “[w]hy?” and Heater respond “for f**ing someone’s wife.” Heater pistol-whipped Siron, and told him that, if he did not help dispose of Oberg’s body, he would die too. They put Oberg’s body into the truck and made several stops while driving to another rural area, where Siron dug a shallow grave. Heater used Siron’s phone to take a picture of the body and to make a call to announce that “it’s done.” The next day, they began destroying evidence and concocted a story about dropping Oberg off at a bowling alley. The body was discovered months later. Heater was convicted of first-degree murder, concealment of a deceased human body, and conspiracy, and sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole.The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, rejecting arguments that Heater was denied his right to counsel of his choice; that the court erred in denying his request to poll the jury to determine whether any members had spoken to a protester who was sitting near the courtroom; and that the court erred in failing to sua sponte order bifurcation of the penalty phase. View "West Virginia v. Heater" on Justia Law