Michael Davis v. Marvin Plumley, Warden

No. 14-0404 (Mineral County 13-C-38) (W. Va. Sept. 19, 2014) · Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia · September 19, 2014 · No. No. 14-0404 (Mineral County 13-C-38)

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the dismissal of Michael Davis’s habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for death of a child by a custodian by child abuse. The court held that the circuit court made sufficiently specific findings addressing Davis’s ineffective-assistance claims and did not abuse its discretion in denying relief.

Court
Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia
Writing for the Court
Robin Jean Davis; Brent D. Benjamin; Margaret L. Workman; Menis E. Ketchum; Allen H. Loughry II
Jurisdiction
West Virginia
Decision date
September 19, 2014
Docket number
No. 14-0404 (Mineral County 13-C-38)
Procedural posture
Petitioner appealed the Circuit Court of Mineral County's order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
Standard of review
In a habeas corpus action, the final order and ultimate disposition are reviewed for abuse of discretion, underlying factual findings are reviewed for clear error, and questions of law are reviewed de novo.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Michael Davis v. Marvin Plumley, Warden, Huttonsville Correctional Center
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

state post-conviction reliefhabeas corpusineffective assistanceappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

state habeas corpuspost-conviction reliefcriminal procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the circuit court made sufficiently specific findings of fact and conclusions of law to dismiss Davis's habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel without a hearing.
  2. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by dismissing the habeas petition when the judge who dismissed it allegedly was not the judge who presided over the trial.
  3. Whether the circuit court's findings were inadequate because they were not supported by proper citations to the record.

Holdings

  1. A circuit court may summarily dismiss an ineffective-assistance habeas petition without a hearing when its findings and conclusions are sufficiently specific to demonstrate that the claims fail under the applicable Strickland/Miller standard.
  2. The circuit court's findings were satisfactory because they specifically explained why each of Davis's four ineffective-assistance claims lacked merit and why any alleged errors did not cause prejudice.
  3. The asserted fact that a different judge may have dismissed the habeas petition than the judge who presided at trial did not warrant reversal.

Key quotations

specific findings of fact and conclusions of law relating to each contention advanced by the petitioner, and to state the grounds upon which the matter was determined. (at 2)
Accordingly, we conclude that the circuit court made satisfactory findings, and that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner’s request for habeas relief and dismissing his habeas petition. (at 3)

Factual background

Davis was the only adult present when his then-girlfriend's twenty-two-month-old child sustained fatal injuries. Medical examiner Dr. James Kaplan testified that the child died from an assault involving violent acceleration and deceleration of the brain and ruled out accidental, self-inflicted, or child-inflicted injuries. Davis was convicted and sentenced to forty years, and later alleged that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present certain witnesses, pursue a plea agreement, properly conduct jury selection, and introduce psychiatric information.

Procedural history

Davis was convicted by a jury in 2003 of death of a child by a custodian by child abuse and was sentenced to forty years in prison. His direct appeal was refused in 2004. In April 2013, he filed a state habeas petition asserting four ineffective-assistance claims. The Circuit Court of Mineral County dismissed the petition without a hearing on December 3, 2013, and the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…