State v. Adkins, No. 13934

• Court: Supreme Court of West Virginia
• Writing for the Court: NEELY
• Citation: 162 W.Va. 815,253 S.E.2d 146
• Parties: STATE of West Virginia v. Dencil Norman ADKINS, alias Denzil Adkins.
• Decision Date: 27 March 1979
• Docket Number: No. 13934

Page 146

253 S.E.2d 146 162 W.Va. 815 STATE of West Virginia
v.
Dencil Norman ADKINS, alias Denzil Adkins. No. 13934. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. March 27, 1979.

Page 147

Syllabus by the Court

1. Where the defendant makes no formal discovery motion for a list of state witnesses in a criminal trial and no formal list is filed with the court in response to a formal motion, a trial court is not in error to permit witnesses to testify for the State who have not previously been placed on a written list where it appears that the defendant was not surprised and had actual notice of the names of the witnesses and the expected testimony.

2. Syl. pt. 1 of State v. Price and Bruce, 114 W.Va. 736, 174 S.E. 518 (1934) and syl. pt. 2 of State v. Bennett, W.Va., 203 [162 W.Va. 816] S.E.2d 699 (1974) are expressly overruled because they are over-broad and in that regard incorrectly state the law. The proper rule concerning admissions and confessions of co-conspirators in the trial of another conspirator is that the admission or confession of an accomplice standing alone, may not be introduced into evidence against another accomplice as an admission against interest; however, one accomplice may testify against another accomplice about the

Page 148

events surrounding the crime with which the defendant accomplice is charged, about the defendant accomplice's part in that crime, about events leading up to the formation of the conspiracy, and about the part the testifying accomplice played in the conspiracy, (including any incidental admissions) so long as the defendant accomplice has an opportunity to cross-examine the testifying accomplice and the testifying accomplice is called by the State for the purpose of giving detailed testimony and not for the purpose alone of demonstrating that the testifying accomplice has either confessed or pled guilty to participating in the crime with which the defendant accomplice is charged.

Kennad L. Skeen, Ripley, for plaintiff-in-error.

Chauncey H. Browning, Atty. Gen., Pamela Dawn Tarr, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, for defendant-in-error.

NEELY, Justice:

This is an appeal from a conviction of first degree, felony murder without a recommendation of mercy in the Circuit Court of Roane County. Two errors are assigned: first, appellant alleges that the State called witnesses who were not on the list of witnesses provided to defense counsel; second, appellant alleges he was convicted upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. We find no error and affirm.

According to the State's key witness, Teddy Lee Wayne, an accomplice, on 6 October 1975, Teddy Lee Wayne received a telephone call at his home in Parkersburg from George Johnson requesting that Mr. Wayne [162 W.Va. 817] follow him to Charleston as Mr. Johnson's car was giving him, Johnson, some trouble. En route at the Ripley exit of Interstate 77, the frame on Johnson's car broke and Johnson then asked Wayne to drive him to Spencer, West Virginia. In Spencer, Wayne parked his car and the two men proceeded to the Green Lantern, a local bar and restaurant. Mr. Johnson asked a waitress if the defendant, Dencil Adkins, had been in that morning; shortly thereafter, the defendant arrived and he and Johnson began to shoot pool. Wayne drank several cups of coffee and observed the pool game from a distance, and while the three men were thus engaged, the victim, Richard Lee Sprouse, a delivery salesman for the Parkersburg Distributing Company, arrived with a shipment of Strohs' beer for the restaurant and received fifty-eight dollars in cash.

The appellant and his two...