West Virginia State Police v. Walker
20-0558
| W. Va. | Nov 19, 2021Background:
- Trooper Derek R. Walker was terminated by the West Virginia State Police for conduct arising from the arrest of J.H.; the agency charged five misconduct counts, including three Group III offenses tied to alleged excessive force.
- The incident: J.H. struck a seated officer’s vehicle with his car, fled at high speed into oncoming traffic, crashed, and refused commands to exit his vehicle.
- The State Police relied on its use-of-force policy in deciding to terminate Walker; the hearing examiner upheld the termination based on that policy.
- The circuit court reversed the hearing examiner, finding legal deficiencies in the examiner’s excessive-force analysis and also (improperly, per the concurrence) substituting its own factual findings for the examiner’s.
- Chief Justice Jenkins concurred with the majority only insofar as the circuit court had impermissibly substituted factual findings, but he dissented from the majority’s disposition regarding the examiner’s excessive-force legal analysis.
Issues:
| Issue | Walker's Argument | State Police's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a circuit court may substitute its factual findings for an administrative hearing examiner | Hearing examiner’s factual findings and credibility determinations are entitled to deference | Circuit court may review and correct agency factual findings | Court: Circuit court erred by substituting its findings for the examiner; examiner’s factual findings get deference (reversal of circuit court on that point) |
| Whether the hearing examiner’s excessive-force analysis properly applied the objective-reasonableness standard | Examiner correctly applied agency policy (which mirrors Graham) and upheld termination | Examiner’s reliance on policy was sufficient to find excessive force | Court (majority): reinstated examiner’s decision; Jenkins: dissent — examiner’s legal analysis was deficient for not applying full Graham/Kingsley factors |
| Whether reliance solely on internal use-of-force policy satisfies the Graham/Kingsley objective-reasonableness inquiry | Policy mirrors federal standard, so it suffices | Policy application alone is adequate to evaluate force | Court (majority): yes; Jenkins: no — exclusive reliance omitted critical factors (e.g., severity of the crime) |
| Remedy/remand posture after errors identified | Reinstate hearing examiner decision unless legal error requires remand for further analysis | Remand for the examiner to apply complete excessive-force legal analysis | Court: reversed circuit court and reinstated examiner decision; Jenkins: would have affirmed circuit court’s reversal of examiner’s legal analysis and remanded for a complete objective-reasonableness analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (establishes the objective-reasonableness test for use of force)
- Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (U.S. 2015) (identifies additional non-exhaustive factors relevant to objective reasonableness)
- Maston v. Wagner, 236 W. Va. 488 (W. Va. 2015) (applies federal excessive-force framework in West Virginia context)
- Cahill v. Mercer Cty. Bd. of Educ., 208 W. Va. 177 (W. Va. 1998) (reviewing court must defer to administrative factfinding; conclusions of law reviewed de novo)