§57-2-1. Handwriting analysis.
In any civil or criminal action or proceeding, any writing proved to the satisfaction of the judge of a court of record in an in-camera hearing to be in the handwriting of the person who is alleged to have written it, whether or not made in the ordinary course of business, may, if the court further finds that its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect, be admitted into evidence for the purpose of making a comparison with a disputed writing on the issue of whether or not the disputed writing is genuine. The authenticity of each writing shall be finally determined by the trier of fact.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 1982–2018 · leading case:
State v. Grubbs, 364 S.E.2d 824 (W. Va. 1987).
State v. Grubbs, 364 S.E.2d 824 (W. Va. 1987).
· cites it 2× “Code, 62-1-5, relied on in Persinger is: "An officer making an arrest under a warrant issued upon a complaint, or any person making an arrest without a warrant for an offense committed in his presence, shall take the arrested person without unnecessary delay before a justice…”
State v. Riley, 287 S.E.2d 502 (W. Va. 1982).
“W. Va. Code, 57-2-1, at that time (since amended to exclude this provision) provided that: In any civil suit or proceeding at law or in equity, and in any criminal action or proceeding, any writing proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be in the handwriting of the person…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.