State of West Virginia v. Eric Corder
16-0237
| W. Va. | Feb 21, 2017Background
- Eric Corder pled guilty to one count each of first-degree sexual assault, third-degree sexual assault, and soliciting a minor via computer; other counts were dismissed under the plea agreement.
- Petitioner stipulated he was a "sexually violent predator" and agreed to 50 years of supervised release after incarceration.
- Pre-sentence materials noted petitioner admitted the FBI had seized his electronics and online accounts.
- At sentencing the circuit court imposed consecutive terms: 15–35 years (first-degree), 1–5 years (third-degree), and 2–10 years (soliciting a minor), for a cumulative 18–50 years, plus 50 years supervised release.
- Corder appealed, arguing the court relied on impermissible factors (reference to FBI seizure and SVP designation) in imposing maximum sentences.
- The West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed, finding the sentences were within statutory limits and not based on impermissible factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the maximum/consecutive sentences are reviewable | State: Sentences are within statutory limits and valid | Corder: Court imposed maximums; challenge as excessive and based on impermissible factors | Affirmed: Sentences within statutory limits; reviewable only if based on impermissible factor, which was not shown |
| Whether reference to an FBI investigation/evidence at sentencing was an impermissible factor | State: Reference was proper and based on facts in record | Corder: Reference to FBI seizure was irrelevant/impermissible and led to harsher sentence | Rejected: Petitioner himself disclosed the FBI seizure in the pre-sentence report; error invited, so no relief |
| Whether designation as a "sexually violent predator" was an impermissible punitive factor at sentencing | State: SVP designation is regulatory and not punitive; record shows no punitive use | Corder: Designation used to justify maximum sentence (impermissible) | Rejected: Court found no evidence SVP label was used to inflict additional punishment; sentencing stayed within statutory ranges |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Goodnight, 169 W.Va. 366 (1982) (sentence within statutory limits and not based on impermissible factor is not subject to appellate review)
- State v. Georgius, 225 W.Va. 716 (2010) (applies Goodnight standard to sentencing review)
- State v. Riley, 151 W.Va. 364 (1966) (invited-error doctrine: no reversal for error introduced or invited by appellant)
- Hopkins v. DC Chapman Ventures, Inc., 228 W.Va. 213 (2011) (applies invited-error principle)