Justia West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Petitioner pled guilty to the misdemeanor crime of sexual abuse in the third degree and was sentenced to the maximum statutory term of ninety days in jail. Petitioner was also required to register as a sexual offender for life. After serving his sentence, Petitioner pled guilty to failing to provide a change in his sex offender registration information. The circuit court sentenced Petitioner to an indeterminate term of one to five years, then suspended the sentence and placed him on probation. Thereafter, Petitioner twice pled guilty to failing to report a change in his information. Petitioner was ultimately sentenced to a term of not less than ten nor more than twenty-five years of incarceration. Petitioner later filed a motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to W. Va. R. Crim. P. 35(b) arguing that his age at the time he committed the misdemeanor third degree sexual abuse and his actions thereafter warranted a lesser sentence. The circuit court denied the motion. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the circuit court did not err in refusing to afford Petitioner mercy. View "State v. Collins" on Justia Law

University Park at Evansdale, LLC (UPE) was the lessor of certain property owned by the West Virginia University Board of Governors commonly known as “University Park.” The Monongalia County Assessor assessed UPE’s leasehold interest in University Park at just over $9 million for the tax year 2015. UPE challenged the assessment, arguing that its leasehold interest was $0 because the leasehold was neither freely assignable nor a bargain lease. The Board of Equalization and Review (BER) affirmed, determining that UPE’s protest presented an issue of taxability, rather than valuation, reviewable only by the Tax Commissioner. The circuit court affirmed, concluding that UPE advanced a challenge that the BER had no jurisdiction to review. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the circuit court erred in concluding that UPE’s protest presented an issue of taxability. Remanded. View "University Park at Evansdale, LLC v. Musick" on Justia Law

At dispute in this case was ownership of coalbed methane (CBM) under a 1938 deed. Respondent filed a complaint against Petitioners seeking a declaration of ownership of all CBM on the property conveyed in the deed and an accounting of royalties from Petitioners. Petitioners filed counterclaims and cross claims also seeking a declaration of ownership and an accounting of royalties. The dispositive issue for determination at trial was whether CBM was considered “gas” for purposes of Petitioners’ “oil and gas” reservation in the deed. The circuit court granted judgment in favor of Respondent, concluding that, based on the totality of the circumstances, the predecessors of Petitioners did not intend the reservation in the 1938 deed to include an interest in the CBM. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the reservation in the 1938 deed did not include CBM due to the general opinion at the time that CBM was a hazard and a nuisance. View "Poulos v. LBR Holdings, LLC" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of first degree murder with a recommendation of mercy and conspiracy to commit burglary. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court did not err in denying Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized from a residence with the property owners’ consent; (2) the trial court did not err by denying Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized from Defendant’s residence; (3) the trial court did not err in denying Defendant’s motion for a change of venue; and (4) Defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right not to wear jail attire during jury voir dire. View "State v. Payne" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, concealment of a deceased human body, and other offenses relating to the death of her twenty-six-day-old infant. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the circuit court did not err by admitting Defendant’s prior bad acts under W. Va. R. Evid. 404(b); (2) Defendant’s argument that her conviction for concealment of a human body and her related conspiracy conviction should be set aside because she took affirmative action within the meaning of W. Va. Code 61-2-5a was without merit; (3) the trial court did not violate Defendant’s constitutional protection against double jeopardy by not merging the child neglect resulting in death and child neglect creating a substantial risk of death counts into a single offense; (4) Defendant’s remaining assignments of error were without merit; and (5) there was no error or abuse of discretion in the court’s sentencing order. View "State v. McDaniel" on Justia Law

William and Kerry Smith filed a complaint alleging that Reginald Grimmett damaged their real property while developing a mobile home community on his adjacent tract of land. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Grimmett. Thereafter, the Smiths filed a motion for a new trial, asserting that the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence and clearly wrong. The circuit court granted the motion. Grimmett appealed, arguing that sufficient evidence was presented at trial to support the jury’s verdict. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the circuit court committed reversible error by setting aside the jury verdict and granting the Smiths a new trial. Remanded for entry of an order reinstating the jury’s verdict. View "Grimmett v. Smith" on Justia Law

The State Tax Commissioner and the Berkeley County Assessor denied an ad valorem property tax exemption to University Healthcare Foundation, Inc. for its property known as the Dorothy McCormack Cancer Treatment & Rehabilitation Center. The circuit court overruled the denial, concluding that the healthcare and recreational services provided in the Center were primarily and immediately related to the joint charitable purposes of the Center and the Berkeley Medical Center. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the circuit court erred in concluding that the Center was being used exclusively for charitable purposes. View "Matkovich v. Univ. Healthcare Found., Inc." on Justia Law

Petitioner pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit the destruction of property and attempt to commit grand larceny. Petitioner was sentenced to consecutive terms of incarceration of one to five years and one to three years, respectively. Petitioner later filed a motion to reduce his sentence under W. Va. R. Civ. P. 35(b). The circuit court denied Petitioner’s Rule 35(b) motion. Petitioner appealed, arguing that the circuit court abused its discretion in not reducing his sentence by awarding him probation or concurrent sentencing and by sentencing him on his felony conspiracy conviction when the evidence indicated that his crime was a misdemeanor. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the circuit court did not commit reversible error in refusing to award either concurrent sentencing or probation; and (2) Petitioner’s assignment of error challenging his felony conspiracy conviction exceeded the scope of Rule 35(b). View "State v. Marcum" on Justia Law

Petitioner was convicted of two counts of felony sexual assault and two counts of felony sexual abuse by a custodian. During the trial, the child victim began testifying in-court but became unresponsive when the State questioned her about Petitioner’s alleged sexual abuse. Thereafter, the trial court sua sponte ordered that the victim testify by live closed-circuit television. Petitioner appealed, arguing that the circuit court erred by ordering the victim to testify by live closed-circuit television. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the circuit court’s failure to follow the mandatory procedural safeguards set forth in W.Va. Code 62-2B01 et seq. did not contribute to the verdict obtained. View "State v. David K." on Justia Law

Petitioners filed a petition in the magistrate court seeking to have Respondent evicted from one of their apartments. The magistrate court dismissed Petitioners’ claim as moot after a hearing. Respondent appealed. Thereafter, Respondent filed a complaint against Petitioners for, inter alia, unpaid wages and wrongful termination. The circuit court entered an order consolidating Respondent’s magistrate court appeal with his circuit court original complaint. Petitioners moved to dismiss three counts of the complaint on the grounds that the issues involved were litigated in the magistrate court proceeding. The circuit court denied the motion to dismiss. Petitioners then brought this writ of prohibition proceeding. The Supreme Court granted the writ as moulded, holding that the circuit court was prohibited from exercising original jurisdiction over the challenged counts in the complaint, as (1) W. Va. R. Civ. P. 42(a) allows consolidation of a magistrate court appeal with an action pending under the original jurisdiction of a circuit court; (2) Respondent’s claims for unpaid wages were not barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel, but those counts may go forward in circuit court as amendments to the magistrate court pleadings; and (3) Plaintiff’s wrongful discharge claim was a new cause of action not embraced by the magistrate cause of action for unpaid wages. View "State ex rel. Veard v. Hon. Lawrance S. Miller" on Justia Law