State of West Virginia v. Paul Darren Spinks, 239 W. Va. 588

Background

On Oct. 31, 2007 Paul Spinks called 911 reporting he and his wife Elizabeth were shot on their front porch; Elizabeth died and Spinks was wounded. He told officers they were shot from a distant white truck in a school parking lot.
Crime-scene evidence included two .22 projectiles, blood pooled under Elizabeth on the porch but little blood elsewhere, a disputed hole in the bathroom floor, multiple firearms recovered, and gunshot-residue testing that produced mixed results.
Initial investigation did not produce charges. In 2014 a cold-case investigator (Corporal White) testified to new findings before a grand jury and an indictment followed; Spinks moved to dismiss the indictment alleging fraudulent grand-jury testimony.
Before trial the State sought to admit evidence of prior domestic violence, marital discord, and threats by Spinks; the court admitted an April 22, 2007 incident as intrinsic and other incidents under Rule 404(b) with limiting instructions.
At trial the State presented trajectory and forensic testimony to dispute Spinks’s account and to show motive/premeditation (history of violence, divorce papers, threats); the jury convicted Spinks of first‑degree murder and imposed life without parole.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Spinks)	Held
Motion to dismiss indictment for grand‑jury fraud	Grand‑jury testimony and reinvestigation were proper; evidence supported probable cause	Grand‑jury witness (Corporal White) made willful/misleading statements that fraudulently procured indictment	Denial affirmed — Spinks failed to show willful, intentional fraud or that improper testimony substantially influenced indictment
Admission of prior domestic violence and marital‑discord evidence	Prior incidents and April 22, 2007 events were intrinsic or admissible under Rule 404(b) to show motive, intent, and context	Evidence was too remote, prejudicial, hearsay, and duplicative	Admission affirmed — April 22 event intrinsic/present‑sense or state‑of‑mind; other incidents admissible under 404(b) with limiting instruction; no abuse of discretion
Jury instructions on lesser‑included offenses (2d° murder; manslaughter)	No instruction required because evidence supported first‑degree murder and premeditation	Court erred by not giving lesser‑included instructions (claimed as plain error)	No plain error — defense theory was misidentification/identity of shooter, not evidence of lesser culpability; no factual basis for lesser instructions
Sufficiency of the evidence (motion for acquittal)	Circumstantial and forensic evidence (wound trajectories, blood patterns, prior violence, inconsistent statements) sufficed to convict beyond reasonable doubt	Evidence was insufficient: no confirmed bullet holes, no GSR, no eyewitness of third‑party shooter, and holes in the State’s case	Conviction affirmed — viewing evidence in light most favorable to prosecution, a rational jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt

Key Cases Cited

Barker v. Fox, 160 W.Va. 749 (W. Va. 1977) (court may not go behind an indictment except for willful, intentional fraud)
State ex rel. Pinson v. Maynard, 181 W.Va. 662 (W. Va. 1989) (standard for dismissing indictments and grand‑jury review)
Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250 (U.S. 1988) (indictment dismissal appropriate only if grand‑jury violations substantially influenced decision to indict)
State v. McGinnis, 193 W.Va. 147 (W. Va. 1994) (Rule 404(b) admissibility requirements and limiting instruction rule)
State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294 (W. Va. 1996) (standard for reviewing Rule 404(b) evidence and presumption against undue prejudice when safeguards met)
State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657 (W. Va. 1995) (standard for appellate review of sufficiency of evidence)