806 S.E.2d 458
W. Va.2017Background
- In Sept. 2016 a Wellsburg police lieutenant filed a complaint after the defendant, a school custodian, allegedly said he would “get a gun and start taking people out” if more work were placed on him; magistrate found probable cause and bound him over.
- A November 2016 grand jury returned a one-count indictment charging defendant under W.Va. Code § 61-6-24(b) (threatening to commit a terrorist act). The indictment tracked the statutory language.
- No pretrial motion to dismiss the indictment was filed by defense counsel; the circuit court, sua sponte and shortly before trial, dismissed the indictment with prejudice on the ground that the alleged threat targeted individuals at a school rather than the civilian population or a branch/level of government.
- The State petitioned this Court for a writ of prohibition to bar enforcement of the dismissal and to reinstate the indictment; the State also sought the judge’s disqualification (which this Court previously refused).
- The Supreme Court of Appeals held the circuit court exceeded its jurisdiction by improperly going behind the grand jury proceedings and dismissing the indictment with prejudice; the Court reinstated the indictment and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Ference) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court exceeded its jurisdiction by sua sponte dismissing the indictment with prejudice | The court improperly supplanted the grand jury’s role, went behind the indictment without allegation of grand jury fraud, and deprived the State of its right to prosecute | Court acted as gatekeeper to ensure indictment was based on a valid quantum of proof and rejected terrorist-statute applicability | Court: dismissal was beyond jurisdiction; prohibition granted; indictment reinstated |
| Whether the alleged threat constituted a “terrorist act” under § 61-6-24(a)(3) because it targeted individuals at a school rather than a government or broad civilian target | The indictment and available evidence were sufficient to charge a terrorist-threat; the school and school board are government entities and the alleged threat could be aimed at influencing or coercing a government entity | The threat targeted individual persons at the school and therefore did not meet the statute’s elements (as a matter of law) | Court: factual questions remain for prosecution/trial; dismissal on that basis was improper—statute could apply and facts not fully developed before grand jury or trial |
| Proper procedural remedy for challenging the circuit court’s dismissal | Writ of prohibition is appropriate because direct appeal under § 58-5-30 is limited and the State was deprived of its right to prosecute | N/A | Court: prohibition appropriate; factors for issuing writ satisfied; reinstated indictment |
Key Cases Cited
- Barker v. Fox, 160 W.Va. 749, 238 S.E.2d 235 (1977) (court cannot go behind grand jury to examine sufficiency of evidence except for willful, intentional fraud)
- Pinson v. Maynard, 181 W.Va. 662, 383 S.E.2d 844 (1989) (grand jury’s function is to determine probable cause, not the truth of charges)
- Yocum v. State, 233 W.Va. 439, 759 S.E.2d 182 (2014) (threat directed at a single individual did not satisfy terrorism statute element of affecting conduct of a branch or level of government)
- Miller v. Smith, 168 W.Va. 745, 285 S.E.2d 500 (1981) (grand jury historically serves both as an investigating sword and as a shield against unfounded prosecutions)
- Vineyard v. O’Brien, 100 W.Va. 163, 130 S.E.2d 111 (1925) (writ of prohibition issues only in clear cases where inferior tribunal proceeds without or in excess of jurisdiction)