State of West Virginia v. Donald Richardson Jordan, 16-0072

Background

Donald R. Jordan was indicted (with co-defendant Willie Dukes) after an August 11–12, 2014 shooting; charges against Jordan included brandishing a deadly weapon, wanton endangerment (firearm), malicious assault, and drug possession; Dukes later pled guilty to wanton endangerment counts.
Pretrial motions by Jordan (to dismiss the indictment, to exclude his “no regrets” statement, to suppress drugs found in his pants, and to sever gun and drug counts) were denied.
At a four-day jury trial Jordan was convicted of brandishing a deadly weapon, wanton endangerment involving a firearm, malicious assault, and possession of a controlled substance (lesser included), and acquitted of assault during the commission of a felony.
Jordan’s post-trial motion for judgment of acquittal was denied; the court sentenced him to concurrent and consecutive terms (one year for brandishing; five years for wanton endangerment; two–ten years for malicious assault).
On appeal Jordan raised seven assignments of error: improper joinder/need for separate trial, defective grand jury testimony, erroneous admission of his “no regrets” statement, improper denial of suppression of drugs found in pants, insufficiency of evidence (judgment of acquittal), improper denial of severance of counts, and due process violation based on discovery of an unsigned complaint.
The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, finding no prejudicial error and addressing several claims on the merits while declining others as moot or inadequately developed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Joinder / separate trial	State implicitly: joinder appropriate given related offenses	Jordan: joinder of alleged victims as co-defendants was prejudicial and required separate trial	Moot as Dukes pled guilty and Jordan suffered no prejudice; Court declines to review further.
Grand jury sufficiency / false testimony	State: grand jury testimony supported indictment	Jordan: grand jury was misled (feud characterization, identification of a .45 S&W)	Court: cannot probe grand jury absent willful fraud; discrepancies were minor and not fraud; indictment stands.
Admission of statement (“no regrets”)	State: statement admissible and probative	Jordan: statement was more prejudicial than probative under WV Rule 403	Court: trial court did not abuse discretion; Jordan failed to show prejudice.
Suppression of drugs found in pants	State: pants were in plain view; warrantless check reasonable when officer handled them and detected weight/weapon concern	Jordan: second search violated privacy; pants had been removed by medics and later searched	Court: facts viewed for State; pants were on public roadway in plain view; officer’s handling and discovery of contraband was reasonable; suppression denial affirmed.
Sufficiency of evidence (judgment of acquittal)	State: testimony and physical evidence supported convictions	Jordan: conflicting testimony, alleged alibi/self‑defense, inability to have fired a gun while holding beer	Court: view evidence in State’s favor; substantial evidence supported convictions; denial of acquittal proper.
Severance of gun and drug counts	State: offenses sufficiently related/time proximate to be joined	Jordan: joinder unfairly prejudiced jury to infer bad character from drugs	Court: trial court acted within discretion; denial of severance affirmed given temporal connection and relevance.
Due process / discovery (unsigned complaint)	State: disclosure sufficient; procedural issues not shown to prejudice defense	Jordan: relied on unsigned complaint and was forced to revise defenses when “proper” complaint provided later	Court: Jordan failed to cite record or explain prejudice; claim inadequately developed and not addressed on merits.

Key Cases Cited

Israel by Israel v. W.Va. Secondary Sch. Activities Comm’n, 182 W.Va. 454, 388 S.E.2d 480 (1989) (three-factor test for addressing technically moot issues)
Barker v. Fox, 160 W.Va. 749, 238 S.E.2d 235 (1977) (court will not go behind an indictment absent willful, intentional fraud)
State ex rel. Pinson v. Maynard, 181 W.Va. 662, 383 S.E.2d 844 (1989) (reiterating limits on challenging grand jury evidence)
State v. Lacy, 196 W.Va. 104, 468 S.E.2d 719 (1996) (standard of review for suppression rulings; factual findings reviewed for clear error)
State v. Thomas, 157 W.Va. 640, 203 S.E.2d 445 (1974) (plain‑view warrantless search requirements)
State v. Grimes, 226 W.Va. 411, 701 S.E.2d 449 (2009) (standard for reviewing motions for directed verdict; evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995) (appellate deference to jury credibility determinations)