State of West Virginia v. John Robert Zsigray, 17-0058

John Robert Zsigray was cited on December 9, 2014 for traveling 35 mph in a 15 mph school zone with children present; charged under W. Va. Code § 17C-6-1(b)(1).
He challenged the ticket; after a magistrate jury trial on October 28, 2015, he was convicted and sentenced to 14 days jail and a $250 fine, with home incarceration and work release allowed; sentence stayed pending appeal.
Zsigray appealed to the Circuit Court of Lewis County, which on December 14, 2016 affirmed the magistrate court’s conviction and sentence.
On further appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, Zsigray raised four main claims: (1) sentence was unconstitutionally excessive, (2) verdict was against the weight/insufficient, (3) prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument, and (4) improper labeling of jury instructions as "defense" or "State" instructions.
The Supreme Court reviewed briefs and record, found no substantial question of law or prejudicial error, and issued a memorandum decision affirming the circuit court on January 8, 2018.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the sentence was unconstitutionally excessive	Zsigray: sentence excessive though within statutory limits; magistrate did not state reasons and may have punished him for going to trial	State: sentence within statutory limits; no record evidence magistrate relied on impermissible factors; appellant must cite record	Affirmed — within statutory limits and appellant failed to show impermissible sentencing factor or cite record support
Whether verdict was against the weight / insufficient evidence	Zsigray: more defense witnesses (2) than State (1); jury should have credited defense witnesses	State: jury credibility determinations are for the jury; the State presented legally sufficient evidence	Affirmed — viewing evidence in State’s favor, credibility is for jury; no insufficiency shown
Whether prosecutor committed misconduct in closing by urging trust in officer	Zsigray: prosecutor’s remark ("if you can’t trust Deputy Tonkin...") appealed to prejudice and shifted focus to officer credibility	State: no preserved objection at trial; failure to object waives review	Affirmed — claim waived for failure to object; not reviewed on merits
Whether labeling instructions "defense" or "State's" was improper	Zsigray: labels were improper and prejudicial	State: appellant failed to object at trial and cites no authority showing error	Affirmed — claim waived for lack of timely objection and no showing of error

State v. Vance, 207 W.Va. 640, 535 S.E.2d 484 (W. Va. 2000) (standard of review for circuit court rulings and factual findings)
State v. Goodnight, 169 W.Va. 366, 287 S.E.2d 504 (W. Va. 1982) (sentences within statutory limits not subject to review absent impermissible factors)
State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (W. Va. 1995) (sufficiency review: view evidence in light most favorable to prosecution; credibility for jury)
State v. Grubbs, 178 W.Va. 811, 364 S.E.2d 824 (W. Va. 1987) (objections required to preserve claims about improper closing argument)
Yuncke v. Welker, 128 W.Va. 299, 36 S.E.2d 410 (W. Va. 1945) (failure to timely object waives appellate review of counsel remarks)
State ex rel. Godfrey v. Rowe, 221 W.Va. 218, 654 S.E.2d 104 (W. Va. 2007) (presumption of regularity in court proceedings; burden on challenger)
Page v. Columbia Nat. Res., 198 W.Va. 378, 480 S.E.2d 817 (W. Va. 1996) (instructions not preserved as error absent timely objection)