State of West Virginia v. Silvan Jobe, 16-0467

In Aug. 2012 Silvan Jobe sexually assaulted a WVU student (V.M.) at knifepoint; victim reported multiple acts of vaginal, anal, and oral intercourse, threats to kill, and restraint; semen evidence and tying were reported.
Jobe was indicted on seven counts of first-degree sexual assault and moved for competency evaluation; initial evaluations were frustrated by uncooperativeness.
After inpatient restoration efforts, a later evaluator found Jobe competent to stand trial; Jobe then notified an intent to assert insanity and requested a criminal-responsibility evaluation one day before trial.
On the first day of trial a court-ordered evaluator (Dr. Adamski) heard victim testimony, interviewed Jobe during recess, and testified that Jobe was criminally responsible at the time of the offenses.
The bench trial (Dec. 10–11, 2013) resulted in convictions on all seven counts; the court denied a motion for judgment of acquittal and denied a post-conviction evaluation, and sentenced Jobe to 15–35 years on each count with two consecutive terms (total 105–245 years).
On appeal Jobe raised three errors: (1) denial of a continuance for a criminal-responsibility evaluation under W. Va. Code §27-6A-4; (2) trial being held 14 days after the competency finding; and (3) denial of a post-conviction evaluation relevant to probation eligibility.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Jobe)	Held
Whether the circuit court erred by refusing to continue trial to allow a criminal-responsibility evaluation under §27-6A-4	No error; evaluation was ordered and conducted; no contemporaneous objection by defense	Court should have continued trial for a §27-6A-4 evaluation given Jobe’s recent mental-health history	Waiver: defense failed to request/object; Jobe underwent evaluation; no reversible error
Whether holding trial 14 days after a competency finding violated Jobe’s rights or reflected ineffective assistance	Court acted within statute; defendant had right to request hearing within 20 days but did not	Short interval prevented adequate preparation; counsel ineffective; entitled to hearing/continuance under §27-6A-3	No error: defense did not request the §27-6A-3 hearing or continuance; competency finding stood and trial timing was permissible
Whether denial of a post-conviction evaluation (for probation eligibility and recidivism/treatment assessment) was erroneous	Court properly exercised discretion; prior psychiatric evaluations and testimony were available for sentencing	Statute conditions probation eligibility on undergoing physical/mental/psychiatric study and treatment plan, so court should have ordered one	No abuse of discretion: court heard victim and expert testimony and did not err in denying further post-conviction evaluation

State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294, 470 S.E.2d 613 (court’s contemporaneous-objection and evaluation-procedure principles)
State ex rel. Cooper v. Caperton, 196 W.Va. 208, 470 S.E.2d 162 (contemporaneous objection / raise-or-waive rule)
State ex rel. Strogen v. Trent, 196 W. Va. 148, 469 S.E.2d 7 (counsel’s duty to investigate / reasonable preparation)
State v. Milam, 159 W. Va. 691, 226 S.E.2d 433 (competency to stand trial requires meaningful participation)
State v. Kent, 213 W.Va. 535, 584 S.E.2d 169 (right to be competent to stand trial and assist in defense)
State v. Shafer, 168 W. Va. 474, 284 S.E.2d 916 (appellate review of probation decisions - abuse of discretion standard)