State of West Virginia v. Kenneth Eugene Carter
232 W. Va. 97
| W. Va. | 2013Background
- Indictment for first-degree murder and malicious wounding; trial court denied pretrial dismissal.
- Trial in May 2012; defendant convicted of murder of Ronald Forton and malicious wounding of Bradie Dunlap.
- Dunlap testified consistent with earlier statements; later admitted lying to police about Forton’s beating.
- Defendant argued Dunlap’s grand jury testimony was fabricated and should have invalidated the indictment.
- Court reviewed indictment de novo with limited behind-the-indictment review; no reversible error found.
- Rule 404(b) evidence admitted regarding prior acts to show intent, with proper limiting instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indictment validity despite alleged perjured grand jury testimony | Carter v. Grimes; indictment valid if grand jury evidence illegally biased not shown | Dunlap’s false statement tainted the grand jury | Indictment valid; no reversible error |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to sustain conviction | Evidence showed Forton killed and Dunlap beaten with bat | Credibility of Dunlap and others undermines guilt | Sufficient evidence supports conviction beyond reasonable doubt |
| Admission of Rule 404(b) evidence of prior acts | Prior acts probative of intent | Prejudicial and beyond legitimate purpose | Proper, with limiting instructions; acts properly admitted for intent |
| Cross-examination and unrelated arrest testimony | Testimony relevant to credibility and context | Testimony not properly limited | No reversible error; court correctly limited and weighed evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Grimes, 226 W.Va. 411 (2009) (standard for motion to dismiss indictment; de novo with clearly erroneous findings when evidentiary hearing)
- Barker v. Fox, 160 W.Va. 749 (1977) (cannot look behind facial validity of an indictment)
- State v. Slie, 158 W.Va. 672 (1975) (indictment validity not challenged by evidence’s character; general rule applies)
- State v. Grimes, 226 W.Va. 411 (2009) (reiterates standard on indictment review)
- State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657 (1995) (sufficiency review of evidence—any rational trier could convict beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294 (1996) (three-step analysis for Rule 404(b) admissibility; probative value vs prejudice; proper purpose; needed specificity)
- State v. Willett, 223 W.Va. 394 (2009) (admission of Rule 404(b) evidence viewed to maximize probative value and minimize prejudice)