Fields v. Whyte, 14056
| Decision Date | 28 March 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 14056,14056 |
| Citation | 242 S.E.2d 463,161 W.Va. 382 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | Ronny FIELDS v. William WHYTE, Superintendent, Huttonsville Correctional Center. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. "The defendant has a right under Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution to be present at all critical stages in the criminal proceeding; and when he is not, the State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that what transpired in his absence was harmless." Syllabus Point 6, State v. Boyd, W.Va., 233 S.E.2d 710 (1977).
2. The State may by appropriate proof rebut an allegation made by a criminal defendant that he was absent during a critical stage of the criminal proceeding.
P. Nathan Bowles, Jr., Bowles, McDavid, Graff & Love, Charleston, for relator.
Chauncey H. Browning, Jr., Atty. Gen., Pamela Dawn Tarr, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, for respondent.
In this original habeas corpus proceeding, relator contends that his constitutional right to be present during all critical stages of his criminal proceedings was violated. West Virginia Constitution, Article III, Section 14. He claims that the record demonstrates that he was not present when proposed instructions were discussed by the court and counsel in the court's chambers.
This Court discussed rather extensively the constitutional right of a defendant to be present during the critical stages of a criminal proceeding in the recent cases of State v. Boyd, W.Va., 233 S.E.2d 710 (1977), and State ex rel. Grob v. Blair, W.Va., 214 S.E.2d 330 (1975). The Sixth Syllabus of the Boyd case reads:
"The defendant has a right under Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution to be present at all critical stages in the criminal proceeding; and when he is not, the State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that what transpired in his absence was harmless."
The State does not contest this law, but maintains that the petitioner's allegation is not true. While the court reporter's transcript does not specifically show that relator was present at the time the instructions were discussed in the court's chambers, the State has submitted to this Court affidavits of the presiding judge, the prosecuting attorney who prosecuted the case, and relator's trial counsel, all of whom aver that relator was present at the time the instructions were discussed in chambers. The veracity of these affidavits is not contested by the relator, except in the petition....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Tiller
...was defined as a proceeding "where the defendant's right to a fair trial will be affected." 233 S.E.2d at 719. 4 In Fields v. Whyte, W.Va., 242 S.E.2d 463 (1978), we concluded that the State could by appropriate post-trial proof rebut an allegation made by a defendant that he was absent dur......
-
State v. Bolling
...v. McKinney, W.Va., 244 S.E.2d 808 (1978) (record silent as to whether In camera hearing held on suppression motion); Fields v. Whyte, W.Va., 242 S.E.2d 463 (1978), and State v. Boyd, W.Va., 233 S.E.2d 710 (1977) (record silent as to presence of accused at a critical stage of the criminal p......
-
State v. Rhodes
...allegation made by a criminal defendant that he was absent during a critical stage of the criminal proceeding." Syllabus Point 2, Fields v. Whyte, W.Va., 242 S.E.2d 463 (1978). Crandall, Pyles, Crandall & Poyourow and Bradley J. Pyles, Logan, for plaintiff in Chauncey H. Browning, Jr., Atty......