Dallas W. Butler v. Marvin Plumley, Warden, 15-0213

On January 17, 2010, Dallas W. Butler assaulted his ex‑wife, Barbara Price, brandished a knife, forced her into his vehicle, continued physical and verbal assaults, and returned her to her mother’s home injured. Medical care and 911 were involved.
A Harrison County grand jury indicted Butler for malicious assault and kidnapping (W. Va. Code § 61‑2‑14(a)). A jury convicted him on both counts; a recidivist finding produced a life (with mercy) sentence for kidnapping and 4–10 years concurrent for malicious assault.
This Court affirmed Butler’s convictions on direct appeal in State v. Butler (memo. decision, 2012).
Butler filed a habeas petition asserting multiple Losh‑type claims (including ineffective assistance, failure to inform of plea offers, insufficiency of indictment, and insufficiency of evidence for kidnapping). At the habeas hearing, counsel narrowed relief to insufficiency of the kidnapping evidence and ineffective assistance at the habeas stage; trial counsel testified.
The circuit court denied habeas relief (Feb. 23, 2015). Butler appealed; the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed by memorandum decision, finding (1) many claims were waived for lack of developed argument, (2) sufficiency of the kidnapping evidence was precluded by res judicata since it was litigated on direct appeal, and (3) the habeas court did not abuse its discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel	Butler listed 22 alleged failings (e.g., counsel failed to convey plea offer; denied request for more experienced counsel).	State argued Butler offered only conclusory lists without factual development or supporting authority.	Waived/insufficient: appellate court found assertions undeveloped and thus waived; no reversible error shown.
Sufficiency of evidence for kidnapping (W. Va. Code § 61‑2‑14(a))	Butler argued indictment lacked language about bodily harm so jury could not find bodily harm element; sought habeas relief on insufficiency grounds.	State relied on trial record and this Court’s prior direct‑appeal decision upholding the kidnapping conviction.	Denied: res judicata bars relitigation; direct appeal already found sufficient evidence.
Right to substitute counsel / proceed pro se	Butler claimed circuit court erred denying substitute counsel or self‑representation.	State noted Butler provided no substantive argument or supporting authority.	Waived: claims unsupported on appeal, therefore deemed waived.
Request to vacate convictions on amended habeas grounds	Butler sought vacation of convictions based on amended petition assertions.	State asserted lack of substantive support; many issues were previously litigated.	Denied: assertions unsupported and barred by prior adjudication; habeas relief properly denied.

Mathena v. Haines, 219 W. Va. 417 (standard of review for habeas appeals: abuse of discretion for ultimate disposition; clearly erroneous for facts; de novo for law)
Losh v. McKenzie, 166 W. Va. 762 (recognizing circumstances under which habeas review may be barred by prior litigation; res judicata principles in habeas proceedings)
State ex rel. Hatcher v. McBride, 221 W. Va. 760 (claims not developed in briefing are waived; courts won’t hunt for arguments)
Morgan v. Price, 151 W. Va. 158 (appellant bears burden of showing error; errors will not be presumed)