Justia West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

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

In 1995, Anstey was convicted first-degree murder, without a recommendation of mercy, in the death of his 81-year-old grandmother during a 1994 fire. There was extensive testimony about Anstey's physical and financial abuse of the victim; both sides presented extensive expert testimony about the cause of the fire. In his 2014 habeas petition, Anstey​ asserted he was entitled to a new trial because the advancement in fire science and arson investigation during the last 20 years constituted newly-discovered evidence which demonstrated the fundamental and unconstitutional unfairness of his trial. The court considered the affidavits of his new fire experts, and the underlying trial record, then denied the petition without holding an evidentiary hearing. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed. The circuit court’s decision was adequately supported by its 36-page order that recounted the evidence from the trial, over which it presided, and its “careful review” of the parties’ briefs and the new expert affidavits, which led it to conclude that “the relevant facts of the case . . . have been sufficiently and adequately developed” for the court to rule as a matter of law. View "Anstey v. Ballard" on Justia Law

On June 11, 2013, Louk, then 37 weeks pregnant, injected methamphetamine into her arm. A few hours later,. Louk experienced breathing problems and went to Summersville Hospital. Dr. Lester treated Louk and testified that Louk presented to the emergency room with acute respiratory distress which was caused by her methamphetamine use. Due to concerns about the fetus being deprived of oxygen, Dr. Rostocki performed an emergency Cesarean section and delivered the child, Olivia Louk, who was born “essentially brain dead.” Olivia “had no movement, no spontaneous respirations, and they had to immediately put her on a ventilator to help her breathe.” Olivia died 11 days after she was born. Louk was convicted of child neglect resulting in death, W.Va. Code 61-8D-4a [1997], and sentenced to three to fifteen years of incarceration. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed. The child neglect resulting in death statute is not intended to criminalize a mother’s prenatal act that results in harm to her subsequently born child. Recognizing “that there may be significant policy implications and social ramifications surrounding the present issue,” the court confined its review to the plain language of the statute. View "West Virginia v. Louk" on Justia Law

Ervin was charged with first degree murder; use of a firearm to commit murder; stalking; wanton endangerment involving the use of a firearm; and domestic assault, in connection with the 2012 death of Layman. Ervin did not deny he shot the victim, with whom he had previously had an intimate relationship, but argued self-defense. Following a seven-day trial, involving 25 witnesses, the jury found him guilty of first-degree murder, wanton endangerment involving a firearm, and first-degree murder using a firearm. . The jury did not recommend mercy with regard to the murder conviction. The court sentenced him to life imprisonment for the murder and to a five-year consecutive term for wanton endangerment. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, rejecting arguments that the trial court erred in: not permitting the jury to visit the site of the alleged offenses; excluding testimony of one defense witness; allowing the jury to consider evidence not presented at trial; allowing the state to misrepresent evidence during closing argument; and not requiring the state to provide a bill of particulars regarding the alleged use of a firearm. The excluded testimony constituted hearsay, not subject to an exception; there was no evidence that the jury actually viewed a video that was not presented. View "West Virginia v. Ervin" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Petitioner, a registered sex offender, was found guilty of failure to register or provide notice of registration charges. The circuit court sentenced Petitioner to a term of years in the penitentiary but suspended the sentence and placed him on a thirty-six month period of probation. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the State presented sufficient evidence to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt that Petitioner failed to update the registry as to his current physical address and that this decision was knowingly made; and (2) Petitioner’s argument that the Sex Offender Registration Act’s provision that requires Petitioner to register changes to his registry information is unconstitutionally vague for failing to define the terms “residence” and “address” was unpersuasive. View "State v. Beegle" on Justia Law

Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder and and attempted murder. Petitioner was sentenced to life in prison without mercy for the murder conviction. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Petitioner’s motion for a continuance of the trial; (2) the trial court did not commit prejudicial error in excluding certain testimony; (3) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of telephone calls Petitioner made while in jail awaiting trial; and (4) the trial court did not err in denying Petitioner’s motion for a mistrial. View "State v. Dunn" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Petitioner was convicted of murder in the first degree without a recommendation of mercy. Petitioner filed a post-trial motion for new trial or judgment of acquittal, which the circuit court denied. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the circuit court did not err by admitting expert opinion testimony from a deputy medical examiner; (2) the State presented sufficient evidence to prove the corpus delicti of murder; (3) the circuit court did not err by refusing to dismiss the case based upon the State’s destruction of evidence; (4) there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction; and (5) the circuit court did not err in refusing to give three of Petitioner’s proposed jury instructions and with regard to the wording of the jury verdict form. View "State v. Surbaugh" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Petitioner was convicted of twenty counts of possession of material visually portraying a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Petitioner also received a related recidivist conviction. Through a second amended sentencing order Petitioner was sentenced to a total period of incarceration of seventeen years. The Supreme Court affirmed Petitioner’s convictions and sentences, holding (1) the trial court did not err when it allowed expert opinion testimony concerning the ages of the children depicted in the images; (2) the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions; (3) Petitioner was not denied his constitutional right to a fair trial when the trial court allowed the State to present hearsay testimony; and (4) Petitioner’s convictions did not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. View "State v. Shingleton" on Justia Law