Charlton A. Horton, Jr. v. David Ballard, Warden, 16-1084

Background

Horton was convicted in 1995 of first-degree murder; sentenced to life without parole; conviction affirmed on direct appeal.
Serology/DNA evidence: Trooper H.B. Myers performed serological testing in 1994; PCR testing by a California lab (Wraxall) matched victim DNA to blood on Horton’s jeans.
Post-conviction, Horton filed habeas petitions alleging Myers falsified serology evidence and that independent DNA testing was needed; an amended petition (2006) focused on whether serology evidence had been falsely acquired/presented.
Circuit court held a habeas hearing in August 2016 (Myers was the sole witness) and denied relief and additional DNA testing in October 2016.
On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court applied the Mathena three-prong standard, rejected Horton’s claims that Myers fabricated evidence or was not credible, and found Horton failed to meet Frazier factors for a new trial.
The Court also held Horton failed to show statutory criteria for court-ordered DNA testing and that any delay in holding the hearing caused no proven prejudice; the denial was affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Horton)	Defendant's Argument (State/Warden)	Held
Whether habeas relief/new trial required because serology evidence was falsified	Myers presented false/ fabricated serology; misconduct discovered after trial; merits a new trial under Frazier	Horton’s allegations are speculative; serology evidence was tested and litigated at trial; circuit court found Myers credible	Denied — Horton failed to prove post-trial discovery of falsified evidence and did not satisfy Frazier factors
Whether circuit court complied with Zain III’s mandate to scrutinize serology and issue detailed findings	Court failed to conduct searching, painstaking scrutiny and merely adopted State’s proposed order	Adopted findings are still those of the court; record shows issues were addressed	Denied — court’s order sufficiently addressed claims and credibility findings stand
Whether Horton was entitled to additional DNA testing under W. Va. Code § 15-2B-14	Independent/ more discriminating DNA testing could exonerate Horton and produce opposite result at retrial	Horton failed to show testing would likely produce an opposite result or that prior testing was unreliable	Denied — statutory criteria not met; testing would not likely change outcome
Whether undue delay in holding habeas hearing violated due process	Ten-year delay between amended petition and hearing violated Zain III timing and prejudiced Horton	No showing that State or court caused prejudice; Horton suffered no proximate harm from delay	Denied as prejudicial — delay, if error, was harmless because claims lacked merit

Key Cases Cited

In Matter of West Virginia State Police Crime Lab (Zain III), 219 W. Va. 408 (W. Va. 2006) (requires searching scrutiny of serology evidence and counsel for habeas claims against non-Zain serologists)
Mathena v. Haines, 219 W. Va. 417 (W. Va. 2006) (three-prong standard of review for habeas findings)
State ex rel. Franklin v. McBride, 226 W. Va. 375 (W. Va. 2009) (standard on habeas review reiterated)
Burdette v. Zakaib, 224 W. Va. 325 (W. Va. 2009) (limits on DNA testing requests and standards for relief)
State v. Horton, 203 W. Va. 9 (W. Va. 1998) (direct appeal affirming Horton’s conviction)
Frazier (Halstead v. Horton), 162 W. Va. 935 (W. Va. 1979) (five-factor test for new trial based on newly discovered evidence)
In Matter of West Virginia State Police Crime Laboratory (Zain I), 190 W. Va. 321 (W. Va. 1993) (invalidated Zain’s serology evidence due to systematic falsification)
In Matter of West Virginia State Police Crime Lab (Zain II), 191 W. Va. 224 (W. Va. 1994) (addressed other serologists’ work and limited impact of errors)
Miller v. Chenoweth, 229 W. Va. 114 (W. Va. 2012) (deference to circuit court credibility determinations)
Cooper v. Caperton, 196 W. Va. 208 (W. Va. 1996) (party-drafted proposed findings may be adopted; appellate review looks to substance)