State of West Virginia v. Patrick Shawn Collins, 238 W. Va. 123

Background

Collins (age 20 at the time) pled guilty in 2006 in magistrate court to third-degree sexual abuse (victim was 14); received 90 days jail and lifetime sex-offender registration.
Between 2007–2009 Collins pleaded guilty to multiple felony counts for failing to update his sex-offender registration; received suspended indeterminate sentences (1–5 years each) and probation; probation was later revoked.
In 2012 Collins pled guilty in Gilmer County to a felony failure-to-register offense (Facebook account and address changes); the court sentenced him to 10–25 years in prison.
Collins filed a pro se habeas petition in 2014; the Gilmer Circuit Court granted leave to file a Rule 35(b) motion and Collins moved to reduce his 10–25 year sentence, citing rehabilitation and youth at time of the underlying conduct.
The circuit court denied the Rule 35(b) motion; Collins appealed, arguing abuse of discretion in denying reduction and, later in briefing, constitutional challenges to proportionality and lifetime registration.
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed: it held the sentence was within statutory limits, no impermissible factors were shown, and Rule 35(b) is not a vehicle to raise constitutional challenges to conviction or sentence.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Collins)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying Collins’s Rule 35(b) motion to reduce his 10–25 year sentence	Collins: sentenced harshly for regulatory violations stemming from a youthful misdemeanor; has rehabilitated, not a current threat, seeks mercy/shorter flat term	State: Rule 35(b) is a discretionary plea for leniency; sentence is within statutory limits and no impermissible factors were relied upon	Denied abuse of discretion; court may decline mercy where sentence is lawful and no improper factors were used
Whether Rule 35(b) may be used to raise Eighth Amendment disproportionality or challenge lifetime registration	Collins: sentence is disproportionate and lifetime registration constitutes cruel and unusual punishment	State: Constitutional challenges to sentence or validity must be raised on direct appeal, not by Rule 35(b)	Not reached on merits; Rule 35(b) cannot be used to challenge conviction/sentence validity; such claims are improperly before the court on Rule 35(b) appeal
Whether the 10–25 year sentence violated statutory or procedural limits	Collins: argued excessive compared to underlying misdemeanor	State: Sentence falls within statutory penalties for failure to comply with registration statute	Held lawful; within statutory bounds and therefore not subject to reversal absent impermissible sentencing factor
Timeliness of the Rule 35(b) motion (raised by lower court but not pressed on appeal)	Collins: was allowed to file by circuit court post-habeas	State: Rule 35(b) motions generally must be filed within 120 days; late filing problematic	Court declined to address timeliness because State did not properly preserve the objection

Key Cases Cited

State v. Head, 198 W. Va. 298, 480 S.E.2d 507 (1996) (standard of review for Rule 35 motions: abuse of discretion for the decision, clearly erroneous for facts, de novo for legal questions)
State v. Goodnight, 169 W. Va. 366, 287 S.E.2d 504 (1982) (sentences within statutory limits and not based on impermissible factors are not subject to appellate reversal)
State v. Payne, 225 W. Va. 602, 694 S.E.2d 935 (2010) (reiterating limits on appellate review of lawful sentences)
Hensler v. Cross, 210 W. Va. 530, 558 S.E.2d 330 (2001) (Sex Offender Registration Act is regulatory, not ex post facto)
Haislop v. Edgell, 215 W. Va. 88, 593 S.E.2d 839 (2003) (public dissemination of certain registration information did not violate ex post facto or due process)
Barritt v. Painter, 215 W. Va. 120, 595 S.E.2d 62 (2004) (Rule 35(b) timing: motion must be filed within 120 days of specified triggers)