Christopher Palmer v. Marvin Plumley, Warden, 16-1076

In July 2012 Christopher Palmer broke into a Summers County residence and stole $1,700 in property; indicted for burglary and grand larceny.
On August 26, 2013, Palmer pleaded guilty to grand larceny under a plea agreement: State would dismiss burglary, recommend release on $5,000 PR bond pending sentencing, and recommend probation (but recommendation was non‑binding).
Palmer was released on conditions but committed similar offenses in Fayette County while on bond; sentencing in Summers County was delayed until May 16, 2014.
At sentencing the Summers County Circuit Court denied probation and imposed 1–10 years imprisonment; Palmer did not appeal that sentence.
Palmer later filed a habeas petition (July 28, 2016) alleging the State breached the plea agreement by failing to recommend probation; the circuit court denied relief, and Palmer appealed to the West Virginia Supreme Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State violated the plea agreement by failing to recommend probation at sentencing	Palmer: State breached the agreement by not recommending probation at the May 16, 2014 sentencing	Plumley/State: No breach shown; plea made clear sentencing was within the court’s sole discretion and recommendation was non‑binding; also Palmer’s later crimes showed he was a poor probation candidate	Court: Affirmed denial of habeas — record does not show a violation of the plea agreement
Whether Palmer waived the breach claim by not appealing his sentence	Palmer: Arguably asserts breach despite no direct appeal	State: Palmer waived the claim by failing to timely appeal the sentencing decision	Court: Declined to affirm on waiver ground (statutory waiver doctrine interpreted narrowly) but noted the lack of appeal; accepted alternate ground for affirmance (no breach on record)
Whether issues about pre‑sentence bond conditions (drug rehab intensity, Day Report Center reporting) are reviewable on appeal	Palmer: Challenges adequacy of bond conditions	State: Issue not preserved below; should not be considered	Court: Declined to address this claim because it was not ruled on by the trial court

Mathena v. Haines, 219 W.Va. 417, 633 S.E.2d 771 (W.Va. 2006) (standard of review in habeas appeals)
State v. Hargus, 232 W.Va. 735, 753 S.E.2d 893 (W.Va. 2013) (appellant bears burden to show error; errors not presumed)
Losh v. McKenzie, 166 W.Va. 762, 277 S.E.2d 606 (W.Va. 1981) (legislative intent that waiver not be applied in a strict procedural sense in post‑conviction habeas context)
Morgan v. Price, 151 W.Va. 158, 150 S.E.2d 897 (W.Va. 1966) (presumption in favor of correctness of trial court judgment)