State of West Virginia v. Etta Marie Webster

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial of Etta Marie Webster’s Rule 35(a) motion to correct her sentence. The court held that clerical errors in the charging and plea documents did not alter the offense to which Webster pleaded guilty or make her one-to-fifteen-year sentence, with parole eligibility after three years, illegal.

Holdings

1. West Virginia Code §§ 60A-4-401(a)(ii) and 60A-4-406(b)(2), which govern delivery of a Schedule II controlled non-narcotic substance, did not apply because Webster pleaded guilty to delivering Oxycodone, a controlled narcotic substance. The applicable provisions were §§ 60A-4-401(a)(i) and 60A-4-406(a)(2), authorizing a sentence of one to fifteen years with parole eligibility after three years.
2. Clerical errors in the Information and plea-related documents did not justify correction or modification of Webster's sentence because she understood the penalty for the narcotics offense and was not misled to her prejudice.
3. Review of a circuit court's ruling on a Rule 35 motion applies abuse of discretion to the ruling itself, clear-error review to underlying factual findings, and de novo review to legal questions and interpretations of statutes and rules.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Webster's sentence was illegal because the charging, plea, and related documents cited the statutory provisions for delivery of a Schedule II controlled non-narcotic substance.
2. Whether the erroneous statutory citations constituted prejudicial errors requiring correction or modification of Webster's sentence under Rule 35(a).
3. What standard of review applies to a circuit court's ruling on a Rule 35(a) motion.

Disposition

affirmed