State of West Virginia v. James Wood, Jr., 20-0095

In the early morning of Sept. 19, 2018, Wood was observed driving a UTV in Marlinton; a Pocahontas County deputy attempted a traffic stop, a pursuit followed, the deputy struck the UTV with his cruiser and fired multiple shots; Wood fled and was later arrested.
After arrest, officers found the UTV had been stolen and items in it taken from a convenience store; Wood was indicted on multiple felony and misdemeanor counts related to theft, burglary, fleeing, destruction of property, and assault on an officer.
At trial Wood’s counsel moved (late) to suppress evidence allegedly obtained as the result of an unreasonable seizure and sought a jury instruction allowing jurors to disregard evidence if they found the seizure unlawful; the court denied the motion and refused the instruction.
The jury convicted Wood of several counts (including felony entry of a building other than a dwelling, felony grand larceny, and felony reckless fleeing) and misdemeanors; the court imposed multiple jail and prison terms, memorialized Jan. 9, 2020.
On appeal Wood argued the stop and seizure lacked probable cause/reasonable suspicion and that excessive force rendered the seizure unlawful; the Supreme Court of Appeals held Wood’s suppression challenge was untimely/waived and that he had conceded probable cause below, so the claim was not preserved.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Wood)	Held
Whether evidence obtained after the stop should have been suppressed as the product of an unreasonable seizure/excessive force	Motion to suppress was untimely; admissibility is for the court; evidence was properly admitted	The stop/forcible seizure (ramming and multiple gunshots) was unreasonable given only a misdemeanor suspicion; evidence obtained should be excluded or jurors instructed to disregard it	Denied: suppression motion waived as untimely and inconsistent with defense below; jury instruction refusing to allow jurors to exclude properly admitted evidence was proper
Whether officer lacked probable cause or reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop	The officer had lawful grounds (and defendant conceded a Terry stop)	Officer lacked reasonable suspicion/probable cause to stop and then used excessive, deadly force	Not reached on the merits: Wood conceded reasonable suspicion at trial, so the claim is not preserved for appeal

State v. Lilly, 194 W. Va. 595, 461 S.E.2d 101 (1995) (sets two-tiered review for suppression rulings: factual findings clearly erroneous; legal conclusions reviewed de novo)
State v. Garrett, 195 W. Va. 630, 466 S.E.2d 481 (1995) (appellate courts will not decide nonjurisdictional questions not first decided by the trial court)
State v. LaRock, 196 W. Va. 294, 470 S.E.2d 613 (1996) (explains raise-or-waive rule and prohibits tactical withholding of objections to preserve appellate claims)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (authorizes brief investigatory stops based on reasonable suspicion)