State of West Virginia v. Todd Kidwell, 16-0163

Todd Kidwell was convicted after a magistrate bench trial (Sept. 17, 2015) of domestic battery and sentenced to 30 days jail, $200 fine, and $165.25 costs.
Kidwell filed a motion for a new trial on Sept. 21, 2015, asserting improper conviction but citing no authority.
The magistrate court orally denied the motion at a Nov. 17, 2015 hearing and entered a written order denying the motion on Nov. 20, 2015.
Kidwell filed an appeal to the circuit court on Dec. 9 or 10, 2015 from the magistrate court’s denial of his motion for a new trial.
The circuit court (Jan. 20, 2016) dismissed the appeal as untimely, concluding the appeal period ran from the oral denial (Nov. 17) and relying on Rowan v. McKnight to say a post-trial motion does not toll the appeal period.
The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding the written order of Nov. 20, 2015 was the effective appeal-triggering order and that Kidwell’s appeal filed Dec. 9/10 was timely under Rule 20.1.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Kidwell’s appeal from the magistrate court’s denial of his new-trial motion was timely.	Kidwell: appeal filed within 20 days after entry of the written order denying the new-trial motion (Rule 20.1).	State/circuit court: appeal period began at the oral denial (Nov. 17), so Dec. 9/10 was late.	Reversed: the appeal period ran from the written order (Nov. 20); Kidwell’s Dec. 9/10 filing was within 20 days, so timely.
Whether a motion for a new trial tolls the 20-day appeal period and whether Rowan v. McKnight required dismissal.	Kidwell: Rule 20.1 controls and permits appeal within 20 days after denial of new-trial motion; written denial triggers period.	State/circuit court: relied on Rowan footnote suggesting motions do not toll appeal periods.	Rejected Rowan’s footnote as inapplicable (civil res judicata context); Rule 20.1 governs and the new-trial motion/its written denial control the appeal timing.

Rowan v. McKnight, 184 W.Va. 763, 403 S.E.2d 780 (W.Va. 1991) (civil res judicata case; dictum about motions not tolling appeal periods noted but found inapplicable here)
Burgess v. Porterfield, 196 W.Va. 178, 469 S.E.2d 114 (W.Va. 1996) (standard of review for circuit court orders)
Chrystal R.M. v. Charlie A.L., 194 W.Va. 138, 459 S.E.2d 415 (W.Va. 1995) (de novo review for statutory interpretation issues)
State v. Davis, 178 W.Va. 87, 357 S.E.2d 769 (W.Va. 1987) (rules promulgated by the Court supersede conflicting procedural statutes)
State ex rel. R.L. v. Bedell, 192 W.Va. 435, 452 S.E.2d 893 (W.Va. 1994) (discussed in relation to precedent on rule/statute conflict)