Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
26 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 2013–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by West Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Losh v. McKenziegreen2 sentences2023I. because he: (1) failed to submit a proposed order; (2) permitted the first day of the omnibus evidentiary hearing to take place without petitioner being 3 The checklist of grounds typically used in habeas corpus proceedings, usually referred to as the Losh checklist, originates from our decision in Losh v. McKenzie, 166 W. 2016Pursuant to Syllabus Point 2 of Losh v. McKenzie, 166 W.Va. 762 , 277 S.E.2d 606, 608 (1981), the doctrine of res judicata will not bar subsequent habeas petitions until there has been an omnibus evidentiary hearing and appointment of counsel. | 2 | 10 |
State Ex Rel. Watson v. Hillgreen1 sentence2021Va. 201 , 488 S.E.2d 476, 477 (1997), which requires specific findings and conclusions on “each contention advanced by the petitioner.” For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the circuit court’s December 21, 2018, order and remand with instructions to appoint counsel for petitioner and hold an omnibus evidentiary hearing on petitioner’s allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Renewed Investigation of the State Police Crime Laboratory, Serology Divisiongreen1 sentence2020On June 28, 2006, we refused petitioner’s appeal from the order denying habeas relief. 1 Petitioner was also convicted of burglary by breaking and entering. 1 Following this Court’s ruling in In re Renewed Investigation of the State Police Crime Laboratory, Serology Division, 219 W. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Millergreen2 sentences2020Va. 3 , 459 S.E.2d 114 (1995). 1 multiple assignments of error in his habeas corpus petition, which was denied by the circuit court after an omnibus evidentiary hearing. 2020Despite these contentions, trial counsel testified at the omnibus evidentiary hearing that give that individual ‘the opportunity to explain the motive and reason behind his or her trial behavior.’ State v. Miller, 194 W. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bolesgreen1 sentence2017Scott v. Boles, 150 W.Va. 453 , 147 S.E.2d 486, 487 (1966). 2 It appears from the record on appeal that petitioner’s trial counsel passed away before the date of the omnibus evidentiary hearing. 3 The circuit court also noted that petitioner likely waived his Rule 11 contention because he failed to include the issue in his direct appeal. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Redmangreen2 sentences2015We have explained that a circuit court speaks through its written orders, which, “as a rule, must contain the requisite findings of fact and conclusions of law ‘to permit meaningful appellate review.’” State v. Redman, 213 W.Va. 175, 178 , 578 S.E.2d 369, 372 (2003) (internal citations omitted). 2015We have explained that a circuit court speaks through its written orders, which, “as a rule, must contain the requisite findings of fact and conclusions of law ‘to permit meaningful appellate review.’” State v. Redman, 213 W.Va. 175, 178 , 578 S.E.2d 369, 372 (2003) (internal citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in West Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Perdue v. Coiner
green
2 sentences2015We have previously held that a circuit court “may deny a petition for a writ of habeas corpus without a hearing and without appointing counsel for the petitioner if the petition, exhibits, affidavits or other documentary evidence filed therewith show to such court’s satisfaction that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.” Syllabus Point 1, Perdue v. Coiner, 156 W.Va. 467 , 194 S.E.2d 657 (1973). 2015We have previously held that a circuit court “may deny a petition for a writ of habeas corpus without a hearing and without appointing counsel for the petitioner if the petition, exhibits, affidavits or other documentary evidence filed therewith show to such court’s satisfaction that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.” Syllabus Point 1, Perdue v. Coiner, 156 W.Va. 467 , 194 S.E.2d 657 (1973). | 5 | 2015–2015 |
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2021The standard for evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel is well established: In the West Virginia courts, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are to be governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984): (1) Counsel’s performance was deficient under an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceedings would have been different. 2021The standard for evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel is well established: In the West Virginia courts, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are to be governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984): (1) Counsel’s performance was deficient under an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceedings would have been different. | 2 | 2017–2021 |
State v. Edward Charles L.
green
2 sentences2022Va. 641 , 398 S.E.2d 123 (1990). 2 This memorandum decision stemmed from petitioner’s third petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 1 2000, petitioner filed a second petition for a writ of habeas corpus raising thirty-one grounds for relief and, after holding an omnibus evidentiary hearing, the circuit court denied the second petition. 2022Id. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Tex S. v. Karen Pszczolokowski, Warden
green
1 sentence2020Va. 3, 15 , 459 S.E.2d 114, 126 (1995).” Tex S. v. Pszczolkowski, 236 W. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Samuel Anstey v. David Ballard, Warden
green
1 sentence2020Va. 411 , 787 S.E.2d 864 (2016), we find that the habeas court did not err in denying petitioner an omnibus evidentiary hearing to expand upon these issues. 8 In his second assignment of error, petitioner argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at his criminal trial. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State ex rel. Scott v. Boles
green
1 sentence2017Scott v. Boles, 150 W.Va. 453 , 147 S.E.2d 486, 487 (1966). 2 It appears from the record on appeal that petitioner’s trial counsel passed away before the date of the omnibus evidentiary hearing. 3 The circuit court also noted that petitioner likely waived his Rule 11 contention because he failed to include the issue in his direct appeal. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Lafler v. Cooper
green
2 sentences2015Petitioner again appealed the denial, and in April of 2013, this Court issued a memorandum decision remanding the matter so that the circuit court could hold an omnibus evidentiary hearing in regard to all issues raised in the amended petition and to reexamine petitioner’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in light of the Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012). 2015Petitioner again appealed the denial, and in April of 2013, this Court issued a memorandum decision remanding the matter so that the circuit court could hold an omnibus evidentiary hearing in regard to all issues raised in the amended petition and to reexamine petitioner’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in light of the Supreme Court of the United States’ decision in Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S.Ct. 1376 (2012). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Riley v. Cal. United States
green
1 sentence2015In August of 2014, petitioner filed a motion to continue and a motion for leave to amend his amended petition for writ of habeas corpus asserting that Riley v. California, 134 S.Ct. 2473 (2014), may apply to his case.2 The circuit court then held an omnibus evidentiary hearing, after which it denied petitioner habeas relief. | 1 | 2015–2015 |