State v. Minigh
Citation | 680 S.E.2d 127 |
Decision Date | 23 June 2009 |
Docket Number | No. 34266.,34266. |
Parties | STATE of West Virginia, Plaintiff Below, Appellee v. Danny MINIGH, Defendant Below, Appellant. |
Court | Supreme Court of West Virginia |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Gill, 187 W.Va. 136, 416 S.E.2d 253 (1992).
2. "" Syllabus Point 1, Conner v. Griffith, 160 W.Va. 680, 238 S.E.2d 529 (1977). Syl. Pt. 2, State v. Gill, 187 W.Va. 136, 416 S.E.2d 253 (1992).
3. "Where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not." Syllabus Point 8, State v. Zaccagnini, 172 W.Va. 491, 308 S.E.2d 131 (1983). Syl. Pt. 6, State v. Gill, 187 W.Va. 136, 416 S.E.2d 253 (1992).
4. ." Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Burd, 187 W.Va. 415, 419 S.E.2d 676 (1991).
5. ." Syl. Pt. 3, State v. Burd, 187 W.Va. 415, 419 S.E.2d 676 (1991).
6. Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Porter, 182 W.Va. 776, 392 S.E.2d 216 (1990).
7. "A trial court's evidentiary rulings, as well as its application of the Rules of Evidence, are subject to review under an abuse of discretion standard." Syl. Pt. 4 State v. Rodoussakis, 204 W.Va. 58, 511 S.E.2d 469 (1998).
8. " ." Syl. Pt. 1, State v. McIntosh, 207 W.Va. 561, 534 S.E.2d 757 (2000).
9. Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Youngblood, 217 W.Va. 535, 618 S.E.2d 544 (2005), cert. granted and judgment vacated on other grounds, 547 U.S. 867, 126 S.Ct. 2188, 165 L.Ed.2d 269 (2006).
10. Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).
11. Syl. Pt 3, in part, State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).
Rocky D. Holmes, Esq. Public Defender Corp., Spencer, Attorney for Appellant.
R. Christopher Smith, Esq., West Virginia Attorney General's Office, Charleston, Attorney for Appellee.
This case is before the Court upon the appeal of the Appellant, Danny Minigh, from the August 20, 2007, Order of the Circuit Court of Calhoun County, denying the Appellant's post-trial motions and sentencing the Appellant to a term of one to five years in the State penitentiary upon his conviction by a jury of one count of conspiracy to commit a felony offense in violation of West Virginia Code § 61-10-31(2005).1 The felony offense at issue is conspiracy to manufacture a Schedule IV controlled substance in violation of West Virginia Code § 60A-4-101(2005). The Appellant argues that the circuit court erred: 1) by not granting the Appellant's Motion to Dismiss based upon Double Jeopardy when a Braxton County circuit court judge swore a jury, took evidence, and granted the Appellant's Motion to Dismiss, stating that the Braxton County charges are in Double Jeopardy with the Calhoun County charges due to the charges being similar in nature; 2) by allowing the Appellee to use evidence in the Calhoun County trial from the Braxton County traffic stop, ruling that this evidence is intrinsic to the charges; and 3) by not granting the Appellant's post-trial Motion for Judgment of Acquittal when the Appellee produced no evidence of a conspiracy occurring within the jurisdiction of Calhoun County.
During the night and early morning of July 22 and July 23, 2004, Trooper Mark Yost of the West Virginia State Police pulled over a vehicle traveling on Route 5 from Interstate 79 heading toward Glenville, in Braxton County, West Virginia. Trooper Yost observed a headlight out on the vehicle, causing him to stop the car. The Appellant was driving the car. He was accompanied by George Dusky, who was the owner of the vehicle and a passenger in the front seat, and James "Bub" Jones, who was a passenger in the back seat.
Trooper Yost testified that the Appellant did not have a driver's license and "appeared to be extremely nervous for a minor traffic violation." The Appellant also gave the trooper a fictitious name, Roger Minigh. After issuing the Appellant a warning, Trooper Yost asked if he could search the vehicle and both the Appellant and Mr. Dusky consented.
During the search, the trooper found a shopping list containing ingredients for methamphetamine, including such items as a hose, matches, and lye. The trooper also found a bag of white pills, one gallon of acetone, four 12-ounce bottles of HEET gas line antifreeze and one bottle of Red Devil lye. The trooper further testified that he found numerous receipts with the same date on them for various products all of which are considered methamphetamine precursors.2 Finally, Trooper Yost testified that when he was removing the items from the vehicle, the Appellant made the spontaneous statement that "[t]hat is mine[,]" referring to the items being removed. Trooper Yost then gave all three men a Miranda3 warning and placed them under arrest.4
According to the Indictment brought in Braxton County, the Appellant was charged with attempting to operate a clandestine drug laboratory, which is a felony offense. The Circuit Court of Braxton County, by Order entered April 13, 2006, dismissed the Indictment against the Appellant, with prejudice. The Braxton County circuit court's Order indicates that prior to trial the Appellant moved to dismiss the Indictment The circuit court further stated in its Order:
The Court then impaneled the jury and the parties conducted voir dire of the jury panel. The parties each exercised their appropriate strikes of the jury. It appearing proper to do so, the Court then swore in the jury panel.
Each party then gave an opening statement. The State of West Virginia by counsel began the presentation of the sworn testimony of its first witness. The defendant, by counsel cross examined the witness.
At the conclusion of cross examination defendant through his counsel renewed his motion to dismiss the indictment on double jeopardy grounds. The state did not resist the motion. The Court then granted said motion.5
Regarding the charges brought in Calhoun County, West Virginia, James "Bub" Jones, one of the passengers in the vehicle...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Perrine v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours And Co.
...than prejudicial under Rule 403.” State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294, 310-11, 470 S.E.2d 613, 629-30 (1996). State v. Minigh, 224 W.Va. 112, 122, 680 S.E.2d 127, 137 (2009) (per curiam). See also McKenzie v. Carroll Int'l Corp., 216 W.Va. 686, 690, 610 S.E.2d 341, 345 (2004) (“[T]his Court revi......
-
State v. Trail
...562, 567 (2011)(per curiam) (citing State v. LaRock,196 W.Va. 294, 304, 470 S.E.2d 613, 623 (1996)). Accord State v. Minigh,224 W.Va. 112, 124, 680 S.E.2d 127, 139 (2009)(per curiam).With due regard for these general standards for our review, we will address the issues raised by Ms. Trail. ......
-
State Va. v. White
...W.Va. 259, 294 S.E.2d 62 (1981).’ Syl. Pt. 3, State v. Burd, 187 W.Va. 415, 419 S.E.2d 676 (1991).” Syllabus point 5, State v. Minigh, 224 W.Va. 112, 680 S.E.2d 127 (2009). 11. “A trial court's evidentiary rulings, as well as its application of the Rules of Evidence, are subject to review u......
-
White v. Searls
... ... 2. The trial court erred in not granting Petitioner's ... Motion for Judgment of Acquittal made at the close of the ... State's case in chief and renewed prior to entry of the ... jury's verdict as the evidence on which jury reached a ... verdict of guilty on the ... (1981).” Syl. Pt. 3, State v. Burd, 187 W.Va ... 415, 419 S.E.2d 676 (1991) ... Syl. pt. 5, State v. Minigh, 224 W.Va. 112, 680 ... S.E.2d 127 (2009). Furthermore, this Court has explained that ... [t]he agreement to commit an offense is the ... ...