State of West Virginia v. Amber Lee Richardson, 811 S.E.2d 260

Amber Richardson was indicted for accessory before the fact to first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder for her husband’s death; she admitted planning the killing with Joshua Hubbard and providing the gun.
The State disclosed extensive digital evidence (an ‘‘item 46’’ CD and an 18‑page printout of text messages) on February 6, 2014; trial originally set for April but was continued twice (to May 28 and then June 10, 2014).
Defense counsel received a copy of the item 46 CD on June 6, 2014 and requested a third continuance four days before trial, claiming inadequate time to review potentially exculpatory cell‑phone data and to retain experts; the court denied the continuance but appointed co‑counsel the day before trial.
At trial the State presented police interviews, autopsy evidence, and digital‑forensics testimony showing communications among Richardson, Hubbard, and the decedent; Richardson testified and admitted active participation in the plot.
The jury convicted Richardson on both counts, did not recommend mercy, and the court sentenced her to life without parole for the accessory first‑degree murder conviction (conspiracy sentence concurrent).
On appeal Richardson challenged denial of the third continuance, alleged discovery violation, admission of autopsy photographs, and refusal to instruct on second‑degree murder; the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed.

Issue	Richardson's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Denial of third continuance	Counsel lacked time to review item 46 CD and cellphone data; prejudice from missed exculpatory texts	CD and contents were disclosed and available since Feb 6 and an 18‑page transcript was provided; multiple continuances already given	Denial not an abuse of discretion — disclosure and time were adequate; no specific missed exculpatory evidence identified
Discovery violation	State failed to provide item 46 CD timely (discovery deadline Feb 18); prejudicial nondisclosure	Existence, contents, and location of CD were disclosed Feb 6; printout provided; CD available for inspection	No discovery violation — CD identified and key text messages provided within deadline
Admission of autopsy (allegedly "gruesome") photos	Photos were prejudicial and court failed to apply Rules 401–403/gruesome‑photo test	Defense did not object on ‘‘gruesome’’ grounds at trial; photos were probative and not manifestly gruesome	Admission not reversible error — objection not made on gruesome ground and photos supported medical testimony
Refusal to instruct on second‑degree murder	Richardson’s testimony that Hubbard overbore her will required manslaughter/second‑degree instruction	No evidentiary basis: Richardson admitted premeditated planning and active participation	Trial court did not err — insufficient evidence to support a lesser‑included instruction; overwhelming evidence of premeditation

State v. Jones, 84 W.Va. 85, 99 S.E. 271 (1919) (trial court has broad discretion to grant or deny continuances; reversal requires abuse plus prejudice)
State v. Bush, 163 W.Va. 168, 255 S.E.2d 539 (1979) (abuse‑of‑discretion continuance inquiry is fact‑specific; consider reasons presented)
State v. Vance, 207 W.Va. 640, 535 S.E.2d 484 (2000) (standard of review: abuse of discretion for new‑trial rulings; clearly erroneous for facts; de novo for law)
State v. Grimm, 165 W.Va. 547, 270 S.E.2d 173 (1980) (prosecution’s nondisclosure is fatal where surprise and prejudice to defense exist)
State v. Guthrie, 194 W.Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995) (jury instructions must be correct, supported by evidence, and reviewed as a whole)
State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294, 470 S.E.2d 613 (1996) (failure to timely raise an objection in trial court generally bars appellate review)
State v. Derr, 192 W.Va. 165, 451 S.E.2d 731 (1994) (gruesome‑photograph admissibility evaluated under Rules 401–403 on a case‑by‑case basis)
State v. Triplett, 187 W.Va. 760, 421 S.E.2d 511 (1992) (ineffective‑assistance claims are rarely resolved on direct appeal; habeas proceedings preferred)
State v. Miller, 194 W.Va. 3, 459 S.E.2d 114 (1995) (direct appeals often lack the developed record needed to evaluate ineffective‑assistance claims)