William G. v. David Ballard, Warden, 15-1189

William G. was convicted by jury in 2005 of first-degree sexual assault of his then five‑year‑old niece; he was 15 at the time of the offense.
At sentencing (June 2005) the circuit court imposed 15–35 years; no direct appeal was taken.
A pre‑sentencing psychiatric evaluation by Dr. Joseph Novello (filed on the day of sentencing) reported a low risk to reoffend and referenced statutory requirements for probation evaluations.
Petitioner and various counsel sought the 2005 sentencing transcript years later; court reporters and the reporting firm testified the transcript/notes could not be located and were likely destroyed after retention periods.
Petitioner sued for habeas relief alleging (1) the State failed to produce the sentencing transcript after timely request, and (2) his trial and reconsideration counsel were constitutionally ineffective for failing to secure/present psychiatric evaluation/treatment plan to obtain probation or alternative sentencing.
The circuit court denied relief after hearings; the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, finding (a) the transcript requests were untimely and petitioner showed no prejudice from the missing transcript, and (b) counsel were not ineffective under Strickland/Miller.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Failure to produce sentencing transcript	William: the missing sentencing transcript, despite requests, entitles him to habeas relief under State ex rel. Johnson v. McKenzie	State: Johnson addresses trial transcripts; here the missing record is a sentencing transcript, requests were untimely, and no prejudice shown	Court: Denied relief — request was untimely; Johnson inapplicable; loss of sentencing transcript did not prejudice William (Shafer/Graham precedent)
Ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing and reconsideration	William: counsel failed to obtain/present an adequate psychiatric evaluation and treatment plan necessary for probation; had they, he likely would have received probation or youthful offender placement	State: Dr. Novello’s report was prepared and filed; counsel reasonably pursued youthful‑offender alternative; no reasonable probability outcome would differ	Court: Denied relief — counsel’s performance not shown deficient and petitioner failed Strickland/Miller prejudice prong; strategic choices not second‑guessed

State ex rel. Johnson v. McKenzie, 159 W.Va. 795, 226 S.E.2d 721 (1976) (due process requires furnishing a timely‑requested trial transcript; remedy may include habeas relief)
State v. Shafer, 168 W.Va. 474, 284 S.E.2d 916 (1981) (loss of sentencing transcript may not require reversal depending on circumstances)
State v. Graham, 208 W.Va. 463, 541 S.E.2d 341 (2000) (missing portions of a transcript warrant new trial only if the omission specifically prejudices the defendant)
Mathena v. Haines, 219 W.Va. 417, 633 S.E.2d 771 (2006) (standard of review for habeas corpus appeals)
State v. Miller, 194 W.Va. 3, 459 S.E.2d 114 (1995) (adopts Strickland two‑prong test for ineffective assistance in West Virginia)
State v. J.S., 233 W.Va. 198, 757 S.E.2d 622 (2014) (presumption of regularity in court proceedings where the record is silent)