Summary
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial of Thomas Shrader’s petition for habeas corpus or, alternatively, coram nobis. The court held that res judicata barred the claims because Shrader had prior opportunities to challenge his convictions and found no error in the circuit court’s decision.
Holdings
- Res judicata barred Shrader's third post-conviction petition because he had prior habeas proceedings and was required to raise all matters known, or discoverable with reasonable diligence, in those proceedings.
- Shrader did not establish that any favorable change in law applied retroactively so as to avoid res judicata.
- The indictments were not shown to be defective: a West Virginia murder indictment need not specify first- or second-degree murder, and the unlawful-wounding indictment did not transpose the names as Shrader claimed.
- The Court affirmed denial of relief through coram nobis, without recognizing a basis for granting that extraordinary remedy on Shrader's claims.
Questions Presented
- Whether res judicata and prior habeas proceedings barred Shrader's successive post-conviction petition.
- Whether the alleged changes in indictment law qualified for the exception to res judicata for favorable, retroactively applicable changes in law.
- Whether the indictments for murder and unlawful wounding were legally defective.
- Whether Shrader was entitled to relief through coram nobis or on his ineffective-assistance claim.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (5)
- State ex rel. Richey v. Hill, 216 W. Va. 155, 603 S.E.2d 177 (2004)(followed)
- United States v. Mayer, 235 U.S. 55 (1914)(followed)
- Losh v. McKenzie, 166 W. Va. 762, 277 S.E.2d 606 (1981)(followed)
- State ex rel. Combs v. Boles, 151 W. Va. 194, 151 S.E.2d 115 (1966)(followed)
- State v. Schnelle, 24 W. Va. 767 (1884)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…