State of West Virginia v. Gregory F. ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                       FILED
    April 20, 2022
    EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK
    STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA                              SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
    SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS                                  OF WEST VIRGINIA
    State of West Virginia,
    Plaintiff Below, Respondent
    vs.) No. 20-0411 (Webster County 14-F-62)
    Gregory F.,
    Defendant Below, Petitioner
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Petitioner Gregory F., 1 a self-represented litigant, appeals the order of the Circuit Court of
    Webster County, entered on May 26, 2020, denying his motion for resentencing. Respondent State
    of West Virginia appears by counsel Patrick Morrisey and Scott E. Johnson.
    This Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The facts and legal
    arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided
    by oral argument. As more fully explained herein, the Court is of the opinion that the circuit court
    erred in denying Mr. F.’s motion for resentencing without first conducting an evidentiary hearing
    to address Mr. F.’s allegation that his trial counsel failed to assist him in filing a direct appeal.
    Accordingly, this case satisfies the “limited circumstance” requirement of Rule 21(d) of the
    Revised Rules of Appellate Procedure and is appropriate for a memorandum decision rather than
    an opinion.
    Pursuant to an agreement with the State, Mr. F. entered a plea of guilty to one count of
    sexual abuse and one count of first-degree sexual assault in the Circuit Court of Webster County
    in December of 2014. In July of 2015, the circuit court sentenced Mr. F. to incarceration for a term
    of five to twenty-five years on the sexual abuse conviction, and a consecutive term of twenty-five
    to one-hundred years on the sexual assault conviction. Mr. F. did not appeal his conviction or
    sentence. In May of 2020, well into his terms of incarceration, Mr. F. filed a motion asking that
    the circuit court resentence him for purposes of appeal. He asserted that he instructed his trial
    attorney to file an appeal, and that he forwarded his attorney a letter asking to discuss a criminal
    appeal, but the trial attorney neither filed nor responded. The circuit court denied Mr. F.’s motion
    1
    Consistent with our long-standing practice in cases with sensitive facts, we use initials
    where necessary to protect the identities of those involved in this case. See In re K.H., 
    235 W. Va. 254
    , 
    773 S.E.2d 20
     (2015); In re Jeffrey R.L., 
    190 W. Va. 24
    , 
    435 S.E.2d 162
     (1993); State v.
    Edward Charles L., 
    183 W. Va. 641
    , 
    398 S.E.2d 123
     (1990).
    1
    by order entered on May 26, 2020, explaining that “[a]ll appeal times ran years ago, and [Mr. F.’s]
    appropriate remedy would be to file an [o]mnibus [h]abeas [c]orpus petition, if he believes he has
    appropriate grounds therefor.”
    Mr. F. asserts three assignments of error on appeal. In short, he argues that the circuit court
    abused its discretion and infringed on his state and federal constitutional rights by (1) failing to
    resentence him; (2) denying his motion without first conducting an evidentiary hearing; and (3)
    denying his motion without first making findings of fact and considered conclusions of law. We
    review Mr. F.’s assignments of error under the following standard:
    “In reviewing challenges to the findings and conclusions of the circuit court,
    we apply a two-prong deferential standard of review. We review the final order and
    the ultimate disposition under an abuse of discretion standard, and we review the
    circuit court’s underlying factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard.
    Questions of law are subject to a de novo review.” Syl. Pt. 2, Walker v. West
    Virginia Ethics Commission, 
    201 W.Va. 108
    , 
    492 S.E.2d 167
     (1997).
    Syl. Pt. 1, State v. Meadows, 
    231 W. Va. 10
    , 
    743 S.E.2d 318
     (2013).
    Mr. F. alleged that his trial counsel failed to act on his instruction to file an appeal. The
    State concedes that this allegation triggered the need for an evidentiary hearing. We explained in
    State v. Higgins, No. 19-0893, 
    2020 WL 5092917
    , at *1 (W. Va. Aug. 28, 2020)(memorandum
    decision), that when a criminal defendant files a motion for resentencing and further alleges that
    his counsel failed to file an appeal after having been directed to do so, the circuit court is obligated
    to provide an evidentiary hearing to consider the merits of the defendant’s allegation. The rationale
    underlying this obligation was explained as follows:
    “One convicted of a crime is entitled to the right to appeal that
    conviction and where he is denied his right to appeal such denial
    constitutes a violation of the due process clauses of the state and
    federal constitutions and renders any sentence imposed by reason of
    the conviction void and unenforceable.” Syllabus, State ex rel.
    Bratcher v. Cooke, 
    155 W.Va. 850
    , 
    188 S.E.2d 769
     (1972).
    Syl. Pt. 1, Billotti v. Dodrill, 
    183 W. Va. 48
    , 
    394 S.E.2d 32
     (1990). “The
    constitutional right to appeal cannot be destroyed by counsel’s inaction or by a
    criminal defendant’s delay in bringing such to the attention of the court, but such
    delay on the part of the defendant may affect the relief granted.” Syl. Pt. 8, Rhodes
    v. Leverette, 
    160 W. Va. 781
    , 
    239 S.E.2d 136
     (1977). Ordinarily, the appropriate
    relief for the denial of the right to appeal is a resentencing, to begin anew the four-
    month appeal time pursuant to Rule 5(f) of the West Virginia Rules of Appellate
    Procedure and West Virginia Code § 58-5-4, and the appointment of appellate
    counsel. See Carter v. Bordenkircher, 
    159 W. Va. 717
    , 726, 
    226 S.E.2d 711
    , 717
    (1976).
    Higgins, 
    2020 WL 5092917
    , at *2.
    2
    For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the order denying petitioner’s motion for
    resentencing and remand this case to the Circuit Court of Webster County to conduct the requisite
    evidentiary hearing. If the circuit court determines that petitioner requested that his attorney file
    an appeal, the circuit court should resentence him for purposes of appeal and appoint appellate
    counsel.
    Reversed and remanded.
    ISSUED: April 20, 2022
    CONCURRED IN BY:
    Chief Justice John A. Hutchison
    Justice Elizabeth D. Walker
    Justice Tim Armstead
    Justice William R. Wooton
    Justice Alan D. Moats sitting by temporary assignment
    3