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.
66 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1976–2025 14 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Knucklesgreen2 sentences2024“Cumulative error analysis should evaluate only the effect of matters determined to be error, not the cumulative effect of non-errors.” State v. Knuckles, 196 W. 2024Va. 416, 426 , 473 S.E.2d 131, 141 (1996) (“[B]ecause we find that there is no error in this case, the cumulative error doctrine has no application.”). | 25 | 25 |
Tennant v. Marion Health Care Foundation, Inc.green2 sentences2024Va. 97 , 459 S.E.2d 374 (1995) (“The cumulative error doctrine may be applied in a civil case when it is apparent that justice requires a reversal of a judgment because the presence of several seemingly inconsequential errors has made any resulting judgment inherently unreliable.”). 2016Questions of law are subject to a de novo review.34 We have said that, if a “verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence, is based on false evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice, the trial judge may set aside the verdict, even if supported by substantial evidence, and grant a new trial.”35 A party is entitled to a new trial “if there is a reasonable probability that the jury’s verdict was affected or influenced by trial error.”36 “The cumulative error doctrine may be applied in a civil case when it is apparent that justice requires a reversal of a judgment because the pre | 5 | 11 |
State of West Virginia v. Marcus Patrele McKinleygreen2 sentences2021Va. 143 , 167 n.22, 764 S.E.2d 303 , 327 n.22 (2014) (“In order to invoke the cumulative error doctrine, there must be more than one harmless error. 2020Va. 143 , 167 n. 22, 764 S.E.2d 303 , 327 n. 22 (2014) (“In order to invoke the cumulative error doctrine, there must be more than one harmless error.”). 28 | 4 | 4 |
State of West Virginia v. Lillie Mae Trailgreen2 sentences2021Cumulative error analysis should evaluate only the effect of matters determined to be error, not the cumulative effect of non-errors.”); see also State v. Trail, 236 W. 2020As we noted in State v. Trail, 236 W.Va. 167 , 188 n.31, 778 S.E.2d 616 , 637 n.31 (2015), the cumulative error doctrine has no application when there is no error. | 3 | 6 |
State of West Virginia v. Tyler G.green2 sentences2022Even if petitioner had managed to establish an instance or two of deficient performance from trial counsel, “the cumulative error doctrine is applicable only when ‘numerous’ errors have been found.” State v. Tyler G., 236 W. 2019Further, “[t]wo errors do not constitute ‘numerous’ for purposes of the cumulative error doctrine.” Id. | 2 | 4 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2022Therefore, there is no indication, much less a reasonable probability, that the result of the proceedings would have been different if counsel had asked Nelson Bailes whether he was related to Ms. Bailes during voir dire. 12 Our standard for reviewing a cumulative error argument was set forth in syllabus point five of State v. Smith, 156 W. 2022Va. 385 , 193 S.E.2d 550 (1972): “Where the record of a criminal trial shows that the cumulative effect of numerous errors committed during the trial prevented the defendant from receiving a fair trial, his conviction should be set aside, even though any one of such errors standing alone would be harmless error.” This Court has recognized that the cumulative error doctrine “should be used sparingly” and only where the errors are apparent from the record. | 1 | 25 |
State v. George W.H.green2 sentences2018See State v. George W.H., 190 W.Va. 558 , 439 S.E.2d 423 (1993). 2018See State v. George W.H., 190 W.Va. 558 , 439 S.E.2d 423 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
Finley v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.green2 sentences2017Co., 208 W.Va. 276, 283 , 540 S.E.2d 144, 151 (1999), “unobjected to errors are not properly the subject of the cumulative error doctrine.” Because six of the alleged errors now claimed to constitute cumulative error were unobjected to below, this Court cannot conclude that this case should be reversed based upon cumulative error. 2017Co., 208 W.Va. 276, 283 , 540 S.E.2d 144, 151 (1999), “unobjected to errors are not properly the subject of the cumulative error doctrine.” Because six of the alleged errors now claimed to constitute cumulative error were unobjected to below, this Court cannot conclude that this case should be reversed based upon cumulative error. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hagergreen1 sentence2015Va. 28, 40 , 511 S.E.2d 139, 151 (1998) (“we find that the absence of an objection at trial waives the right to complain on appeal.”). 26 764 S.E.2d 303 , 327 n.22 (2014) (“In order to invoke the cumulative error doctrine, there must be more than one harmless error. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cookgreen2 sentences2015Mr. McKinley cannot rely on this doctrine because only one harmless error was found in this case.”); State v. Cook, 228 W.Va. 563, 572 , 723 S.E.2d 388, 397 (2010) (‘While the State concedes that one of the four enumerated evidentiary rulings was error,' it argues that the other evidentiary rulings relied upon by Appellant were riot an abuse of the trial court’s discretion. 2015Mr. McKinley cannot rely on this doctrine because only one harmless error was found in this case.”); State v. Cook, 228 W.Va. 563, 572 , 723 S.E.2d 388, 397 (2010) (‘While the State concedes that one of the four enumerated evidentiary rulings was error,' it argues that the other evidentiary rulings relied upon by Appellant were riot an abuse of the trial court’s discretion. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Quinn
green
1 sentence2025Pt. 6, State v. Quinn, 200 W. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Sugg
green
1 sentence2022Va. 388 , 456 S.E.2d 469 (1995), provides: Four factors are taken into account in determining whether improper prosecutorial comment is so damaging as to require reversal: (1) the degree to which the prosecutor’s remarks have a tendency to mislead the jury and to prejudice the accused; (2) whether the remarks were isolated or extensive; (3) absent the remarks, the strength of competent proof introduced to establish the guilt of the accused; and (4) whether the comments were deliberately placed before the jury to divert attention to extraneous matters. 5 Petitioner argued in a fifth assignment | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Flack
green
1 sentence2022In Flack, we explained that “[w]hether the trial court should instruct the jury how the accomplice’s testimony could, or could not, be considered is a matter best left to the discretion of defense counsel” as “[d]efense counsel may have ample reason to get beyond an accomplice’s damaging testimony as quickly as possible.” Id. at 714, 753 S.E.2d at 767 . 8 Petitioner argues that we should review the issues he raises pursuant to the cumulative error doctrine. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Youngblood
green
1 sentence2022Id. 3 I concur with the majority’s resolution of petitioner’s remaining two assignments of error: that the habeas court erred in finding that he was not “materially prejudiced” because one of the jurors was related to a witness for the State, and that he is “entitled to relief based upon the cumulative error doctrine.” 17 different from that reached by the lower court, stating that “[i]t is now so well settled that the Court was able to speak . . . of the ‘long course of judicial construction which establishes as a principle that the duty rests on this Court to decide for itself facts or const | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Kennedy v. Frazier
green
1 sentence2020Because we find that the circuit court did not err in denying petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus on any of the grounds set forth regarding ineffective assistance of counsel, we find that petitioner’s skeletal cumulative error assertion is also without merit. 9 Relying on North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), this Court held in syllabus point 1 of Kennedy v. Frazier, 178 W. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
North Carolina v. Alford
green
1 sentence2020Because we find that the circuit court did not err in denying petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus on any of the grounds set forth regarding ineffective assistance of counsel, we find that petitioner’s skeletal cumulative error assertion is also without merit. 9 Relying on North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), this Court held in syllabus point 1 of Kennedy v. Frazier, 178 W. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Martinez v. Ryan
green
1 sentence2017ISSUED: October 13, 2017 4 We also reject petitioner’s argument based on the cumulative error doctrine because we concur with the circuit court’s finding that there are “no meritorious grounds for relief.” See State v. Trail, 236 W.Va. 167 , 188 n.31, 778 S.E.2d 616 , 637 n.31 (2015) (finding that cumulative error doctrine has no application when there is no error). 5 The Supreme Court in Martinez addressed whether a procedural rule, known as the doctrine of procedural default, barred a state prisoner from asserting the claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel in a federal habeas proce | 1 | 2017–2017 |
In Re State Public Building Asbestos Litigation
green
2 sentences2016Questions of law are subject to a de novo review.34 We have said that, if a “verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence, is based on false evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice, the trial judge may set aside the verdict, even if supported by substantial evidence, and grant a new trial.”35 A party is entitled to a new trial “if there is a reasonable probability that the jury’s verdict was affected or influenced by trial error.”36 “The cumulative error doctrine may be applied in a civil case when it is apparent that justice requires a reversal of a judgment because the pre 2016Questions of law are subject to a de novo review.34 We have said that, if a “verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence, is based on false evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice, the trial judge may set aside the verdict, even if supported by substantial evidence, and grant a new trial.”35 A party is entitled to a new trial “if there is a reasonable probability that the jury’s verdict was affected or influenced by trial error.”36 “The cumulative error doctrine may be applied in a civil case when it is apparent that justice requires a reversal of a judgment because the pre | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Hutchinson
green
1 sentence2015Our cases have made clear that a “claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is generally not ripe for direct appellate review.” State v. Hutchinson, 215 W. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Fahy v. Connecticut
green
2 sentences2013Va. 124 , 451 S.E.2d 425 (1994) as follows: Where constitutional rights are involved, the United States Supreme Court in Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 , 84 S.Ct. 229 , 11 L. 2013Va. 124 , 451 S.E.2d 425 (1994) as follows: Where constitutional rights are involved, the United States Supreme Court in Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 , 84 S.Ct. 229 , 11 L. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Kelley
green
2 sentences2013However, under our long-established doctrine of cumulative error, I cannot agree that the combination of five errors, all egregious, all prejudicial, and three in clear violation of the Constitution, were harmless.1 1 The standard for determining whether error is harmless where constitutional rights are involved was discussed by the Court in State v. Kelley, 192 W. 2013Va. 124 , 451 S.E.2d 425 (1994) as follows: Where constitutional rights are involved, the United States Supreme Court in Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 , 84 S.Ct. 229 , 11 L. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Moran v. Atha Trucking, Inc.
green
2 sentences2001However, since we find no error in this case, the cumulative error doctrine is inapplicable. [1] In Syllabus Point 5 of Moran v. Atha Trucking, Inc., 208 W.Va. 379 , 540 S.E.2d 903 (1997), we stated: A sudden emergency instruction is to be given rarely, in instances of truly unanticipated emergencies which leave a party little or no time for reflection and deliberation, and not in cases involving everyday traffic accidents arising from sudden situations which, nevertheless, reasonably prudent motorists should expect. 2001However, since we find no error in this case, the cumulative error doctrine is inapplicable. [1] In Syllabus Point 5 of Moran v. Atha Trucking, Inc., 208 W.Va. 379 , 540 S.E.2d 903 (1997), we stated: A sudden emergency instruction is to be given rarely, in instances of truly unanticipated emergencies which leave a party little or no time for reflection and deliberation, and not in cases involving everyday traffic accidents arising from sudden situations which, nevertheless, reasonably prudent motorists should expect. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Riggle v. Allied Chemical Corp.
green
2 sentences1995Although we noted in Riggle v. Allied Chemical Corp., 180 W.Va. 561 , 378 S.E.2d 282 (1989), that we had never applied the cumulative error doctrine to civil proceedings, nothing in that opinion or in the nature and purpose of the cumulative error doctrine forecloses the future application of the doctrine to civil cases. 1995Although we noted in Riggle v. Allied Chemical Corp., 180 W.Va. 561 , 378 S.E.2d 282 (1989), that we had never applied the cumulative error doctrine to civil proceedings, nothing in that opinion or in the nature and purpose of the cumulative error doctrine forecloses the future application of the doctrine to civil cases. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.