Troy G. v. Donnie Ames, Superintendent, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex
21-0081
| W. Va. | Apr 20, 2022Background
- Petitioner Troy G. was convicted in March 1996 by a jury of 57 sexual offenses and sentenced to 40–100 years imprisonment.
- He exhausted direct appeal and filed multiple post-conviction habeas petitions: first denied without an omnibus hearing; second denied after an omnibus evidentiary hearing (trial and appellate counsel found effective); third dismissed as previously adjudicated and affirmed on appeal.
- The fourth habeas petition (this case) alleged trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call a rebuttal witness, L.G., and that prior habeas counsel were ineffective for not raising that issue.
- The circuit court found trial counsel knew of L.G.’s statements before trial and that substantial independent evidence supported the convictions (petitioner’s statement to police, wife’s testimony of admissions, victim’s detailed DHHR statement).
- The court concluded the claim was barred by res judicata (previously litigated) and that habeas counsel was not ineffective for omitting a previously adjudicated and meritless claim; the petition was denied and that denial was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to call L.G. | L.G. would have impeached the victim and could have led to reasonable doubt | Trial counsel knew of L.G.; there was strong independent evidence of guilt; issue previously litigated | Barred by res judicata; court found no ineffective assistance; claim denied |
| Ineffective assistance of habeas counsel for not raising the L.G. issue | Prior habeas counsel failed to raise the trial-counsel omission | Habeas counsel may omit issues that were previously fully litigated or meritless; cannot be ineffective for not raising nonmeritorious claims | Habeas counsel acted professionally; claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Mathena v. Haines, 219 W. Va. 417, 633 S.E.2d 771 (2006) (three-prong standard of review for habeas appeals)
- Meadows v. Mutter, 243 W. Va. 211, 842 S.E.2d 764 (2020) (appellate review standard in habeas proceedings)
- Perdue v. Coiner, 156 W. Va. 467, 194 S.E.2d 657 (1973) (appellant bears burden to show error below)
- Gibson v. Dale, 173 W. Va. 681, 319 S.E.2d 806 (1984) (post-conviction habeas ordinarily limited to one proceeding as of right)
- Losh v. McKenzie, 166 W. Va. 762, 277 S.E.2d 606 (1981) (prior omnibus habeas hearing is res judicata as to matters raised or which with reasonable diligence could have been known)
- Antolini v. West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, 220 W. Va. 255, 647 S.E.2d 535 (2007) (purpose of res judicata: conserve judicial resources and avoid relitigation)