State of West Virginia v. Alvie N.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial of Alvie N.'s motion under West Virginia Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b) seeking concurrent sentences or an alternative placement. The court held that Rule 35(b) permits only sentence reduction, does not provide a vehicle to challenge the validity of a sentence, and that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief.

Holdings

1. Rule 35(b) authorizes only a reduction in sentence and cannot be used to challenge a conviction or the validity or legality of the sentence imposed. Such challenges must be brought through a timely direct criminal appeal.
2. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner's Rule 35(b) motion because petitioner identified no material post-sentencing event or changed circumstance warranting a reduction in his consecutive sentences.
3. When a defendant is convicted of two separate crimes, the trial court has discretion to impose concurrent sentences; absent an order directing concurrency, the sentences run consecutively.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Rule 35(b) permitted petitioner to challenge the validity or alleged illegality of his sentence after he failed to pursue a timely direct appeal.
2. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying petitioner's Rule 35(b) request for concurrent sentences or other sentence reduction.
3. Whether petitioner had established a right to transfer to a particular penal institution.

Disposition

affirmed