Williams v. People
2013 V.I. Supreme LEXIS 13
Supreme Court of The Virgin Is...2013Background
- Williams convicted of second degree murder, first degree assault, third degree assault, and three counts of unauthorized use of a firearm during a crime of violence; this Court previously affirmed convictions but remanded for re-sentencing under 14 V.I.C. §104.
- Superior Court issued an Amended Judgment (July 11, 2012) staying some sentences but not all firearm convictions, effectively continuing to stay only two of the firearm-related sentences.
- Williams filed a pro se appeal; counsel issues and potential ethics referrals related to prior counsel were raised during the appellate process.
- This Court held the Amended Judgment was an appealable final order and retained jurisdiction to review, despite prior referrals to the EGC regarding counsel conduct.
- On appeal, Williams challenges numerous aspects of the Amended Judgment, but the Court ultimately vacates and remands because the Superior Court failed to comply with the June 29, 2012 opinion's stay-and-impose directives for multiple counts, particularly the firearm convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Amended Judgment is a final appealable order | Williams v. People argued lack of finality due to stay. | Onyejekwe argued lack of jurisdiction because of stay. | Court held Amended Judgment is appealable final order. |
| Whether the Superior Court’s failure to stay two firearm convictions on remand violated §104 and the June 29, 2012 opinion | Williams contends two firearm sentences must be stayed per remand order. | People contested the necessity of staying those particular counts. | Court vacates Amended Judgment and remands to stay two firearm convictions consistent with §104. |
| Whether re-sentencing could occur without Williams’s physical presence | Amended Judgment issued by mail violated right to presence at re-sentencing. | Irons precedent allows non-appearance if remand does not authorize new sentencing. | VI law permits resentence without physical presence under remand order; no violation found. |
| Whether the Amended Judgment complied with the June 29, 2012 Opinion | Amended Judgment did not implement the required stays for all implicated counts. | Court previously interpreted remand directives differently. | Plain error found; Amended Judgment violated June 29, 2012 directive; vacated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson-Flavius v. People, 57 V.I. 716 (V.I. 2012) (recognizes final judgment rule in Virgin Islands criminal appeals)
- Potter v. People, 56 V.I. 779 (V.I. 2012) (final judgment rule in appealability of criminal judgments)
- Melendez v. People, 56 V.I. 244 (V.I. 2012) (limits on appellate review following remand)
- Huron Holding Corp. v. Lincoln Mine Operating Co., 312 U.S. 183 (U.S. 1941) (stay of execution does not negate finality of judgment)
- In re Rogers, 56 V.I. 618 (V.I. 2012) (EGC/disciplinary proceedings context in VI Supreme Court)