Jason William Holstein v. David Ballard, Warden, 16-0420

Background

On January 19, 2009 Holstein and two co-defendants committed a violent home robbery during which the victim, David Scarbro, was beaten and shot; Scarbro died at the scene.
Holstein was indicted on multiple counts and, on April 12, 2010, pleaded guilty to first-degree felony murder pursuant to a plea agreement in which the State dismissed other counts and agreed to stand silent at sentencing.
The plea hearing record shows Holstein was informed of rights waived, confirmed understanding, stated he was satisfied with counsel, and acknowledged potential life sentence without parole.
At sentencing the presentence report detailed Holstein’s extensive criminal history and included witness statements implicating him as the shooter; the court sentenced Holstein to life without parole.
This Court affirmed Holstein’s conviction and sentence in State v. Holstein, rejecting claims his plea was involuntary and that his sentence was unconstitutionally disparate from co-defendants.
Holstein filed a post-conviction habeas petition alleging (1) disproportionate sentence and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to investigate, seek psychological exam, object to presentence statements, present mitigation, and misadvice about parole eligibility); the circuit court dismissed the petition without prejudice under Rule 4(c).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Holstein’s sentence was unconstitutionally disproportionate	Holstein claims he expected parole eligibility and that his life-without-parole sentence is harsher than co-defendants’ sentences	State and court point to plea record, presentence factors (criminal history, remorse), and prior appellate decision upholding disparity	Dismissed as previously and finally adjudicated; disparity not per se unconstitutional and court did not abuse discretion
Whether counsel was ineffective in plea negotiations/investigation	Counsel failed to investigate, obtain grand jury transcript, retain experts, and prepare defense	Record shows counsel reviewed discovery, hired an investigator, served subpoenas, and was prepared for trial; many claimed errors waived by guilty plea	Allegations insufficient under Strickland; no reasonable probability of different outcome; dismissal appropriate
Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving for psychological evaluation	Holstein cites bipolar diagnosis and claims it affected plea competency	Court notes plea colloquy showed lucidity, understanding of rights, and voluntary plea	No ineffective assistance; record contradicts claim plea was involuntary
Whether habeas petition warranted a hearing or appointment of counsel under Rule 4(c)	Holstein contends his factual allegations justify a hearing and counsel appointment	State and circuit court: allegations are conclusory and contradicted by the record; prior appellate decision controls	Court properly dismissed without prejudice under Rule 4(c); no hearing or appointed counsel required

Key Cases Cited

State v. Holstein, 235 W.Va. 56, 770 S.E.2d 556 (W.Va. 2015) (affirming plea voluntariness and explaining factors relevant to co-defendant sentence disparity)
Mathena v. Haines, 219 W.Va. 417, 633 S.E.2d 771 (W.Va. 2006) (three-prong standard of review for habeas appeals)
Perdue v. Coiner, 156 W.Va. 467, 194 S.E.2d 657 (W.Va. 1973) (habeas petitions may be denied without a hearing if documentary evidence shows no relief is due)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong ineffective assistance test)
State v. Miller, 194 W.Va. 3, 459 S.E.2d 114 (W.Va. 1995) (adopting Strickland standard in West Virginia)
State v. Robey, 233 W.Va. 1, 754 S.E.2d 577 (W.Va. 2014) (discussing when sentence disparities among co-defendants may warrant reversal)