State Va. v. White
Decision Date | 10 February 2011 |
Docket Number | No. 35529.,35529. |
Citation | 707 S.E.2d 841,227 W.Va. 231 |
Parties | STATE of West Virginia, Plaintiff Below, Appelleev.Larry S. WHITE, II, Defendant Below, Appellant. |
Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
1. “ Syllabus point 1, Lively v. Rufus, 207 W.Va. 436, 533 S.E.2d 662 (2000).
2. Syllabus point 3, State v. Vance, 207 W.Va. 640, 535 S.E.2d 484 (2000).
3. Syllabus point 4, State v. Miller, 197 W.Va. 588, 476 S.E.2d 535 (1996).
4. “Actual bias can be shown either by a juror's own admission of bias or by proof of specific facts which show the juror has such prejudice or connection with the parties at trial that bias is presumed.” Syllabus point 5, State v. Miller, 197 W.Va. 588, 476 S.E.2d 535 (1996).
5. Syllabus point 6, State v. Miller, 197 W.Va. 588, 476 S.E.2d 535 (1996).
6. Syllabus point 1, State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).
7. Syllabus point 3, State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).
8. Syllabus point 2, State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294, 470 S.E.2d 613 (1996).
9. Syllabus point 5, State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).
10. “ .’ .” 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 under an abuse of discretion standard.” Syllabus point 4, State v. Rodoussakis, 204 W.Va. 58, 511 S.E.2d 469 (1998).
12. Syllabus point 6, State v. Ramsey, 209 W.Va. 248, 545 S.E.2d 853 (2000).
13. Syllabus point 1, State v. Lacy, 196 W.Va. 104, 468 S.E.2d 719 (1996).
14. When searching a vehicle pursuant to a valid search warrant, no additional search warrant is required to examine the contents of items that are properly seized in the execution of the warrant, including, but not limited to, cellular telephones.
15. Syllabus point 7, State v. Black, ––– W. Va. ––––, –––S.E.2d ––––, 2010 WL 761061 (2010).
16. “There are three components of a constitutional due process violation under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and State v. Hatfield, 169 W.Va. 191, 286 S.E.2d 402 (1982): (1) the evidence at issue must be favorable to the defendant as exculpatory or impeachment evidence; (2) the evidence must have been suppressed by the State, either wilfully or inadvertently; and (3) the evidence must have been material, i.e., it must have prejudiced the defense at trial.” Syllabus point 2, State v. Youngblood, 221 W.Va. 20, 650 S.E.2d 119 (2007).
Matthew L. Clark, Kayser Layne & Clark, PLLC, Point Pleasant, WV, for Appellant.Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., Attorney General, Barbara H. Allen, Managing Deputy Attorney General, Charleston, WV, for Appellee.
In this appeal, Larry S. White, II, defendant below (hereinafter referred to as “Mr. White”), challenges an order of the Circuit Court of Jackson County convicting him of one count of first-degree murder and one count of conspiracy to commit a felony, and sentencing him to life with mercy for the first-degree murder conviction, and a consecutive sentence of one to five years for the conspiracy. Mr. White contends that the trial court committed the following errors: (1) failing to grant his motions to strike two prospective jurors; (2) convicting him upon insufficient evidence; (3) admitting evidence that was the fruit of an unlawful search of a cellular telephone; (4) admitting certain out-of-court statements under Rule 801(d)(2)(E) of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence; and (5) refusing to grant his “Amended Renewed Motion for New Trial” based upon alleged violations of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). After a thorough review of this appeal, we find no error. We therefore affirm the circuit court's order.
According to the evidence presented at trial,1 at the time relevant to the instant matter, the defendant, Mr. White, and Roseann Osborne, the victim's wife (hereinafter referred to as “Ms. Osborne”), had been romantically involved for some time, had lived together for nearly a year, and had a young child together, notwithstanding the fact that Ms. Osborne was, throughout this time, married to Muhamed Mahrous (hereinafter referred to as “Mr. Mahrous”). There also was evidence that Mr. White...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
White v. Searls
...the contents of it could be search without a search warrant being obtained.” (Id., pp. 3 - 4.) Petitioner asserts that in White I, 227 W.Va. 231 (2011), SCAWV held that “when searching a vehicle pursuant to a valid search warrant, no additional search warrant is required to examine the cont......
-
White v. Plumley, 14-1272
...for the first-degree murder conviction, and a consecutive sentence of one to five years for the conspiracy. See State v. White, 227 W.Va. 231, 707 S.E.2d 841 (2011) (Davis, J.), republished as, State v. White, 228 W.Va. 530, 722 S.E.2d 566 (2011). In March of 2011, petitioner, pro se, filed......