State v. Ayers, 14414
| Decision Date | 09 October 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 14414,14414 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE of West Virginia v. Orville Keith AYERS. |
Syllabus by the Court
Where the assignments of error in a criminal appeal concern issues which are addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, this Court will examine the record and where the court concludes that the trial court did not abuse his discretion, the judgment below will be affirmed.
Lee H. Adler, Beckley, for plaintiff in error.
Chauncey H. Browning, Atty. Gen., Charleston, S. Clark Woodroe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, for defendant in error.
Appellant was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance. His indictment was roughly four months after the commission of the crime and appellant assigns as error pre-indictment and pre-trial delay. While pre-indictment and pre-trial delay can prejudice a defendant, there was no such prejudice in this case. Appellant requested an instruction which would have told the jury that appellant's inability to account for his activities on the night in question could be attributable to the four month hiatus. The court refused the instruction and in doing so did not abuse his discretion. Whether pre-indictment delay has caused actual prejudice requiring curative action is always an issue addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court.
The police undercover agent attempted to testify that after the drug buy he procured defendant's photograph to verify his identity. Appellant contends that this implied to the jury a previous criminal record. However, appellant then argues that the eye witness identification was weak. The immediate comparison of appellant's name and physical description with existing police files was crucial to verification of the undercover agent's identification. The court correctly admitted the agent's testimony about the comparison of his personal observation with the file photograph and correctly limited the scope of the testimony by refusing to allow discussion of the photograph's exact origin.
The court's instruction on alibi which indicated that the burden of establishing alibi was on the defendant, but that the burden was met if the alibi raised a reasonable doubt about the defendant's presence at the crime was correct. While the trial court did behave discourteously to counsel on occasion no prejudice resulted and the error was harmless.
Accordingly the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Richey
...as having a need for some delay to prevent exposure of its undercover informers and to analyze the evidence. See also State v. Ayers, 168 W.Va. 137, 282 S.E.2d 876 (1981). to the returning of the indictment. He claims that the delay&nb......
-
State v. Hutchinson
...that the instruction was valid under Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 684, 95 S.Ct. 1881, 44 L.Ed.2d 508 (1975). See also State v. Ayers, 168 W.Va. 137, 282 S.E.2d 876 (1981) (instruction placing burden of proof on defendant to establish alibi was proper). Counsel's failure to look beyond State......
-
State v. Bennett
...by weighing the reasons for delay against the impact of the delay upon the defendant's ability to defend himself." In State v. Ayers, 168 W.Va. 137, 282 S.E.2d 876 (1981), we found that a four-month delay was not prejudicial, even though the defendant contended that he was unable to account......
-
Hundley v. Ashworth
...(1984); State v. Bennett, 172 W.Va. 123, 304 S.E.2d 28 (1983); State v. Simmons, 171 W.Va. 722, 301 S.E.2d 812 (1983); State v. Ayers, 168 W.Va. 137, 282 S.E.2d 876 (1981).7 The full text of Syllabus Point 1 of Leonard is set out in note 5, supra.8 This test has been followed by a number of......