fifth assignment error in West Virginia

2022Va. 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

2014Pt. 5, State v. Miller, 194 W.Va. 3 , 459 S.E.2d 114 (1995). 4 Again, we note that the circuit court had not ruled on the motion for alternative sentence agreement at the time that this appeal came before us, and we will not prematurely consider it. 3 Finally, we easily dispense with the fifth assignment of error, in which petitioner argues that he did not receive an evaluation pursuant to West Virginia Code § 62-12-2(e) after he filed his motion for reconsideration of sentence.

2014Pt. 5, State v. Miller, 194 W.Va. 3 , 459 S.E.2d 114 (1995). 4 Again, we note that the circuit court had not ruled on the motion for alternative sentence agreement at the time that this appeal came before us, and we will not prematurely consider it. 3 Finally, we easily dispense with the fifth assignment of error, in which petitioner argues that he did not receive an evaluation pursuant to West Virginia Code § 62-12-2(e) after he filed his motion for reconsideration of sentence.

1999We have held that “[w]hether facts are sufficient to justify the delivery of a particular instruction is reviewed by this Court under an abuse of discretion standard.” Syl. pt. 12, in part, State v. Derr, 192 W.Va. 165 , 451 S.E.2d 731 (1994).

1999We have held that “[w]hether facts are sufficient to justify the delivery of a particular instruction is reviewed by this Court under an abuse of discretion standard.” Syl. pt. 12, in part, State v. Derr, 192 W.Va. 165 , 451 S.E.2d 731 (1994).

1986We’re not questioning that.” This Court held in Syllabus Point 4 of State v. Michael, 141 W.Va. 1 , 87 S.E.2d 595 (1955), that, “Error in the admission of testimony to which no objection was made will not be considered by this Court on appeal or writ of error, but will be treated as waived.” 14 Therefore, we find no merit in the appellant’s fifth assignment of error.

1986We’re not questioning that.” This Court held in Syllabus Point 4 of State v. Michael, 141 W.Va. 1 , 87 S.E.2d 595 (1955), that, “Error in the admission of testimony to which no objection was made will not be considered by this Court on appeal or writ of error, but will be treated as waived.” 14 Therefore, we find no merit in the appellant’s fifth assignment of error.

1983Apart from the issue of the *542 admissibility of the results of polygraph examinations in West Virginia, “[a] prosecution that withholds evidence which if made available would tend to exculpate an accused by creating a reasonable doubt as to his guilt violates due process of law under Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution.” Syl. pt. 4, State v. Hatfield, 169 W.Va. 191 , 286 S.E.2d 402 (1982); see also State v. Grimm, 165 W.Va. 547 , 270 S.E.2d 173 (1980); State v. McArdle, 156 W.Va. 409 , 194 S.E.2d 174 (1973).

1983Apart from the issue of the *542 admissibility of the results of polygraph examinations in West Virginia, “[a] prosecution that withholds evidence which if made available would tend to exculpate an accused by creating a reasonable doubt as to his guilt violates due process of law under Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution.” Syl. pt. 4, State v. Hatfield, 169 W.Va. 191 , 286 S.E.2d 402 (1982); see also State v. Grimm, 165 W.Va. 547 , 270 S.E.2d 173 (1980); State v. McArdle, 156 W.Va. 409 , 194 S.E.2d 174 (1973).

1983Apart from the issue of the *542 admissibility of the results of polygraph examinations in West Virginia, “[a] prosecution that withholds evidence which if made available would tend to exculpate an accused by creating a reasonable doubt as to his guilt violates due process of law under Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution.” Syl. pt. 4, State v. Hatfield, 169 W.Va. 191 , 286 S.E.2d 402 (1982); see also State v. Grimm, 165 W.Va. 547 , 270 S.E.2d 173 (1980); State v. McArdle, 156 W.Va. 409 , 194 S.E.2d 174 (1973).

1983Apart from the issue of the *542 admissibility of the results of polygraph examinations in West Virginia, “[a] prosecution that withholds evidence which if made available would tend to exculpate an accused by creating a reasonable doubt as to his guilt violates due process of law under Article III, Section 14 of the West Virginia Constitution.” Syl. pt. 4, State v. Hatfield, 169 W.Va. 191 , 286 S.E.2d 402 (1982); see also State v. Grimm, 165 W.Va. 547 , 270 S.E.2d 173 (1980); State v. McArdle, 156 W.Va. 409 , 194 S.E.2d 174 (1973).

1895The court sets aside and annuls the deed, not alone as to the preference given, but in loto, directly contrary to the decision of this court in the case of Kurner v. O'Neil, 39 W.

1881In requiring your petitioner to pay interest on said rents, though he held the land adversely to eomplainant claiming and believing it to be his own.” In the said case of Early et ux. v. Friend et al., 16 Gratt. 21 .