×

West Virginia justices have differing views on three strikes law

Photos courtesy of the West Virginia Supreme Court and West Virginia Legislative Photography Justice Margaret Workman and Justice Tim Armstead

CHARLESTON — A recent decision by the West Virginia Supreme Court tracks with legislation meant to reduce punishment for non-violent felonies, but a justice believes the court re-wrote state law.

The Supreme Court ruled in a 4-1 decision on April 3 that the life sentence meted Wyoming County resident Joe Roger Lane should be reversed. The case was sent back to the Wyoming County Circuit Court for re-sentencing.

The 45-year-old Lane was convicted and sentenced to life in prison in 2015 after he was charged with selling prescription painkillers.

Under the state’s three strikes law, if someone is convicted of a third felony and one of those felonies is for a violent crime, that person can spend the rest of their lives in prison. Lane’s first felony in 1997 was for unlawful wounding, but he was also convicted of a felony in 2009 for transferring stolen property.

Lane appealed his life sentence in 2017, as well as the drug conviction which the court did not overturn. Attorneys for Lane argued that the state Constitution prohibits disproportionate sentences and that courts should consider all the offenses, including the third offense that trigger’s the right of circuit judges to hand down life sentences.

Lane’s only violent crime conviction was 18 years earlier than his third felony conviction and both convictions since 1997 were for non-violent crimes.

Justice Margaret Workman penned the opinion for the majority, which included Chief Justice Beth Walker and Justices Evan Jenkins and John Hutchison. In that majority opinion, Workman argues the state Constitution Article III Section 5 requires that any penalties in a sentence “shall be proportioned to the character and degree of the offense.”

“Despite the statute providing that a life sentence ‘shall’ be imposed where a defendant has been convicted of three felonies, any life sentence imposed by the circuit court under the recidivist statute, nonetheless, is subject to scrutiny under the proportionality clause of our Constitution,” Workman wrote.

Citing previous state Supreme Court decisions, Workman wrote that circuit judges shouldn’t put the sole emphasis for a life sentence on the third felony without looking at the underlying crimes behind the previous felony convictions.

“Despite the state’s argument to the contrary, the facts surrounding the final triggering offense committed by the petitioner — the delivery of four Oxycodone pills — did not involve any actual or threatened violence,” Workman wrote. “The prior sentences imposed on the petitioner for these prior felonies were not serious penalties so as to justify this court now imposing a life recidivist sentence.”

Justice Tim Armstead dissented from the majority’s decision, citing the court’s inconsistencies in interpreting the state’s three strikes law.

“The application of West Virginia’s recidivist statute … has undergone a significant transformation by this court over the past four decades,” Armstead wrote. “… This court has gradually strayed from a straightforward and consistent application of the clear language of the statute to engage in an ever-evolving effort to reformulate the statute and impose a myriad of hurdles to its application.”

Armstead believes that language in the three strikes law is clear, requiring a life sentence if any one of three felonies is for a violent crime. The former speaker of the House of Delegates believes the law should be applied as written and that the Legislature should take a look at the matter.

“When this court determines that a statute adopted by the Legislature violates such constitutional rights, I believe it is proper for the Legislature … to attempt to remedy the Constitutional deficiency,” Armstead wrote. “Accordingly, I would strongly urge the Legislature to revisit the recidivist statute in light of this court’s previous decisions and take such steps, if any, it deems appropriate to address the Constitutional concerns previously expressed by this court.”

The Legislature over the last few years, however, has been working to reduce the number of people incarcerated in state prisons and regional jails. During the 2019 legislative session, lawmakers passed Senate Bill 152, which creates a way to expunge the record for people convicted of non-violent felonies five years after the conviction. The bill passed both the House and Senate with bipartisan support.

“I think this bill provides a reasonable and narrow path to expungement for people who deserve it,” said Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Trump, R-Morgan, during debate on the bill March 9.

“I’m someone who has sent people to prison for their entire life for trafficking in drugs,” said Sen. William Ihlenfeld, D-Ohio, a former U.S. Attorney. “The only way we’re going to find our way out of the problem we’re in right now – perhaps the worst drug problem in the entire country – is if we give people a second chance.”

Gov. Jim Justice also focused on expungement of criminal convictions through Jim’s Dream. The program, unveiled during his State of the State address Jan. 9, creates a new drug prevention program for school students, a substance abuse treatment program for those addicted to drugs and a job-training program. If a person completes this program, their misdemeanor drug convictions would be expunged.

“If I’m an addict and I’m in treatment and I get better, and then I go into some level of training and I get a certificate, I will be able to take that to a court and get immediate expungement of a misdemeanor I have,” Justice said about Jim’s Dream.

Starting at $2.99/week.

Subscribe Today