State of West Virginia v. Sonja Bone and Monty Bone, 17-0754 & 17-0801

Elderly victim (87) was found in home with severe pressure ulcers, bruises, skin tears, infection, dehydration, acute renal failure, and shingles; she had not seen a physician in ~18 months and died about a month after hospitalization.
EMTs and hospital staff described deplorable home conditions (filth, clutter, animal urine smell) and the victim’s altered consciousness; nursing and physician testimony documented injuries inconsistent with simple falls and indicative of abuse/neglect.
Victim reported to medical staff that family members (identified as Monty and possibly Brendan) kicked, punched, stomped on her feet, and that Monty threw her down and failed to bathe/turn/feed her; she asked not to be returned home.
Monty and Sonja Bone were jointly indicted and tried for abuse and neglect of an incapacitated adult causing serious bodily injury, malicious assault, and conspiracy; convictions were for lesser-included offenses (abuse/neglect causing bodily injury) and conspiracy; some counts acquittals.
Trial evidence included hospital photographs of injuries, victim statements to medical staff admitted under the medical-treatment hearsay exception, and bank records showing substantial expenditures by Monty from the victim’s joint account.
Trial court denied motions for a new trial; this Court affirmed those rulings but vacated the sentences because they fell below statutory minimums and remanded for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of victim’s bank records	Relevant to incapacitation, control of finances, motive, and ability to pay for care	Monty had legal right as joint account holder to spend funds; records irrelevant or unfairly prejudicial	Admissible; trial court did not abuse discretion given evidence showing funds were available but not used for victim’s care
Admission of gruesome photographs	Photographs probative of serious bodily injury	Some photos cumulative or discolored and unduly prejudicial	Admissible; trial court properly balanced Rules 401/403 and did not abuse discretion
Admission of victim’s statements to hospital staff (hearsay)	Statements offered to prove abuse but fall under medical-treatment exception (Rule 803(4))	Victim delirious; statements not made with motive promoting treatment and not the type relied on for diagnosis	Admissible under 803(4); statements were pertinent to treatment/safety decisions and properly admitted
Burden-shifting via cross-exam/closing remarks	State’s questions/remarks highlighted lack of documentary proof of prescriptions	Defendants argue improper shift of burden to prove innocence	Waived on appeal due to failure to object at trial; not considered

State v. Vance, 207 W. Va. 640 (2000) (standard of review for new-trial rulings and factual findings)
McDougal v. McCammon, 193 W. Va. 229 (1995) (trial court discretion on evidentiary rulings)
State v. LaRock, 196 W. Va. 294 (1996) (admissibility decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Gentry v. Mangum, 195 W. Va. 512 (1995) (abuse-of-discretion guidance for weighing probative value vs. unfair effect)
State v. Derr, 192 W. Va. 165 (1994) (framework for admitting gruesome photographs under Rules 401–403)
State v. Edward Charles L., 183 W. Va. 641 (1990) (two-part test for admitting hearsay under Rule 803(4))
State v. Guthrie, 194 W. Va. 657 (1995) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Juntilla, 227 W. Va. 492 (2011) (clarifying sufficiency-of-evidence review)
State v. Lucas, 201 W. Va. 271 (1997) (standard for reviewing sentencing orders)