State of West Virginia v. Kevin Richard Helms, 16-0089

Kevin Richard Helms, a former supervisor/caretaker at Potomac Center (a residential facility for individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities), was indicted on multiple counts arising from abusive conduct toward clients.
In March 2015 Helms pled guilty, via plea agreement, to one count of child abuse resulting in injury (W. Va. Code § 61-8D-3(a)); remaining counts were dismissed.
At sentencing (Dec. 7, 2015), the court heard counsel, Helms’s police statement, and a guardian ad litem’s brief statement; defense sought probation/alternative sentence citing acceptance of responsibility and low recidivism risk.
The State urged that Helms committed numerous misconducts during employment, including multiple suspensions, and opposed probation.
On January 5, 2016 the circuit court sentenced Helms to incarceration for not less than one nor more than five years (within the statutory range) and denied probation; Helms appealed asserting the sentence was excessive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the circuit court abused its discretion in imposing Helms’s sentence	State: Sentence is lawful, within statutory limits, and appropriate given misconduct	Helms: Sentence is excessive; he is a strong candidate for probation and incarceration is an extreme hardship on family	Affirmed: Sentence within statutory range; reviewed for abuse of discretion and not shown; sentence not subject to appellate relief absent illegality or impermissible factors

Georgius v. State, 225 W.Va. 716, 696 S.E.2d 18 (2010) (establishes deferential abuse-of-discretion standard for reviewing sentencing orders and that sentences within statutory limits are generally not disturbed)
Goodnight v. State, 169 W.Va. 366, 287 S.E.2d 504 (1982) (holds that sentences within statutory limits and not based on impermissible factors are not subject to appellate review)