Justia West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant appealed, arguing that the circuit court erred in granting the State’s motion in limine preventing Defendant from cross-examining a State witness about the terms of a pretrial diversion agreement she had entered into with the State. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in granting the State’s motion in limine, as there was no factual basis for Defendant’s assertion that the witness’s pretrial diversion agreement could have led to her being pressured or induced into giving a statement to the investigating officer in Defendant’s case. View "State v. Williams" on Justia Law

The West Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) revoked Robin Riner’s drivers license due to her failure to submit to a secondary chemical test. The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) reversed the revocation for refusing to submit to the secondary chemical test, finding that the arresting officer failed to comply with the implied consent statute. The circuit court affirmed the OAH’s final order. The Supreme Court reversed the order of the circuit court to the extent it affirmed the OAH’s decision to reinstate Riner’s drivers license despite her refusal to submit to the secondary chemical test, holding that the arresting officer complied with his statutory duties under the implied consent statute. Remanded for the reinstatement of the revocation of Riner’s drivers license. View "Reed v. Riner" on Justia Law

Petitioner, who worked as a registered nurse at a Hospital, was terminated for allegedly violating the Hospital’s narcotic waste policies. Petitioner self-reported her termination to the West Virginia Board of Registered Professional Nurses. The Board issued a notice of complaint on April 2, 2013. On August 14, 2013, the Board issued an interim status report to the Hospital. A hearing was eventually set for January 20, 2015 but was continued until February 19, 2015. Petitioner filed this petition for a writ of prohibition asserting that the Board’s failure to resolve the complaint against her within one year from the date of the status report pursuant to W. Va. Code 30-1-5(c) divested it of jurisdiction to proceed on the complaint. The Supreme Court granted Petitioner’s requested relief, holding that the Board exceeded its jurisdiction in this case by failing to comply with the statutory mandates of section 30-1-5(c). View "State ex rel. Miles v. W. Va. Bd. of Registered Prof’l Nurses" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of first-degree murder, without a recommendation of mercy. Defendant was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the evidence supported instructions on theories of felony-murder and lying-in-wait murder theories, the trial court did not err in denying Defendant’s request to force the State to make an election between the murder theories, and while the instruction on lying-in-wait murder was incorrect, this error was harmless; (2) the trial court correctly refused to give a voluntary manslaughter jury instruction; (3) the examination of a rebuttal witness by the State was not improper; (4) the trial court did not err in admitting a recording of a psychiatric interview of Defendant; (5) the trial court did not improperly restrict the testimony of Defendant’s expert; and (6) the trial court did not err in allowing the State to cross-examine Defendant’s expert in certain areas. View "State v. Lambert" on Justia Law

The West Virginia Department of Transportation (DOH) filed a condemnation action against Western Pocahontas and Beacon Resources, Inc. seeking to take approximately thirty acres owned by Western Pocahontas and leased to Beacon to construct a portion of a highway. The circuit court granted DOH the right to take possession of the land. Beacon objected to the DOH’s valuation of the coal underlying the thirty acres of land taken. During trial, the owner of Beacon gave his opinion of the fair market value for Beacon’s lease based solely upon his opinion of the future profits of his business. The jury returned a verdict awarding Western Pocahontas and Beacon $24 million as just compensation for the mineral interest acquired by the DOH and for damages to the residue. The DOH appealed, arguing that the circuit court erred in refusing to instruct the jury to disregard lost business profits earned by Beacon when calculating just compensation. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the DOH was entitled to an instruction that the jury was not to consider evidence of Beacon’s lost business profits when assessing just compensation. Remanded for a new trial. View "W. Va. Dep’t of Transp. v. W. Pocahontas Props., LP" on Justia Law

Tinkerbell, a female pit bull terrier, injured a neighbor child who was playing in the yard of Michael and Kim Blatt. The circuit court ordered that Tinkerbell, the family pet of the Blatts, be euthanized pursuant to West Virginia’s vicious dog statute. In making its decision, the circuit court relied on a presumption that pit bull dog breeds are inherently vicious. The Supreme Court reversed the circuit court’s destruction order, holding (1) because extensive debate exists over whether scientific evidence and social concerns justify breed-specific presumptions, courts may not, upon judicial notice, rely solely upon a breed-specific presumption in ordering the destruction of a dog pursuant to W. Va. Code 19-20-20; and (2) the facts and circumstances surrounding the bite in this case did not support the circuit court’s determination that Tinkerbell is dangerous within the meaning of section 19-20-20. View "State v. Blatt" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of felony murder and conspiracy to commit burglary. Defendant was sentenced to life with mercy on his conviction of felony murder. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Defendant’s statements to a police officer in a police cruiser on the way to jail were voluntarily made and thus properly admitted into evidence; (2) the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a witness’s hearsay statements, as the statements were not testimonial and were admissible under a firmly rooted hearsay exception; (3) the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in admitting phone call statements Defendant made from jail, which were recorded by jail authorities; (4) the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in admitting either exemplar shoes purchased by the State as a demonstrative aid or an investigator’s opinion testimony concerning the shoes; and (5) the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the convictions. View "State v. Bouie" on Justia Law

Defendant entered an Alford plea of guilty to unlawful assault. Defendant was subsequently notified that he would be processed for deportation to Jamaica because of his felony conviction. When Defendant was discharged from his sentence he was turned over to the federal government for deportation proceedings. Defendant filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, alleging that his trial counsel was deficient for failing to inform him that his guilty plea could result in his being deported. The circuit court denied relief, concluding (1) the writ of error coram nobis did not exist in West Virginia, (2) a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is not a recognized ground for relief under the writ, and (3) Defendant failed to show that his counsel did not inform him of the deportation consequences of his guilty plea. The Supreme Court reversed, holding (1) in West Virginia, the common law writ of error coram nobis is available in criminal proceedings; and (2) courts permit a constitutional legal error claim to be brought under the writ of error coram nobis so long as the framework adopted in this opinion for asserting a constitutional legal error is followed. Remanded for the circuit court to apply the test to the facts of this case. View "State v. Hutton" on Justia Law

The case involved an alleged fraudulent scheme involving United Bank and McQuade Appraisal Services (collectively, Respondents) to inflate the value of property in a residential development called Walnut Springs Mountain Reserve (Walnut Springs). Walnut Springs ultimately failed and was abandoned by the developer. Petitioners were owners of lots in Walnut Springs. The circuit court dismissed Petitioners’ claims, concluding, inter alia, that the majority of the claims were time-barred by the two-year statute of limitations. The Supreme Court (1) reversed the circuit court’s dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claims for fraud in the inducement and aiding and abetting fraud in the inducement, negligence, intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress, breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, respondent superior, and punitive damages, as the claims were not time-barred; and (2) affirmed the circuit court’s dismissal of Plaintiffs’ remaining claims, holding that the court’s judgment regarding these claims was not in error. View "Evans v. United Bank, Inc." on Justia Law

The West Virginia State Treasurer separately filed sixty-three complaints against insurance companies doing business in West Virginia, alleging that the insurers unlawfully retained life insurance proceeds unclaimed by state residents in contravention of the West Virginia Uniform Unclaimed Property Act of 1997. The circuit court dismissed the complaints for failure to state a claim, concluding that the insurer should be permitted to retain the proceeds of the insured’s life insurance policy until someone having a contractually derived interest makes a formal claim in accordance with the policy. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the Act requires insurers, as holders of property presumed abandoned, to account for and turn over that property to the Treasurer. View "State ex rel. Perdue v. Nationwide Life Ins. Co." on Justia Law