Magna Carta News
Saturday, August 30, 2003
West Virginia Prosecutorial Misconduct
A study of criminal appeals from 1970 to the present revealed 59 West Virginia cases in which the defendant alleged prosecutorial error or misconduct. In 20, judges ruled a prosecutor’s conduct prejudiced the defendant and reversed or remanded the conviction, sentence or indictment. In one, a dissenting judge or judges thought the prosecutor’s conduct prejudiced the defendant. Of the defendants who alleged misconduct, two later proved their innocence.
Of the 20 cases in which judges ruled a prosecutor’s conduct prejudiced the defendant, 10 involved improper trial argument or examination, six involved the prosecution withholding evidence from the defense and the remaining cases involved threatening a witness, use of a private prosecutor, conflict of interest and the denial of a speedy trial.
Raleigh County assistant prosecuting attorney Kristen Keller tried five of the 59 cases. In two, judges ruled her conduct prejudiced the defendant. In three, judges ruled her conduct was harmless error and did not prejudice the defendant.
Keller prosecuted Marvin Steve Mills for a 1999 murder. During trial, Keller used Mills’ constitutional right not to testify by questioning if he had shown remorse.
During closing argument, Keller told the jury that “there are cases in which the murderer himself says, ‘I am so sorry; I am so sorry. I beg your forgiveness.’”
The court held that this comment, along with others, denied Mills a fair trial and reversed his conviction.
In 1994, Keller prosecuted Julie Wyatt for child abuse, neglect and murder by failure to provide medical care. During the trial, she asked questions about Wyatt’s involvement in satanic rituals. The state appeals court condemned the questions and ruled they deprived Wyatt of a fair trial.
“We are persuaded that in the circumstances of this case, the only purpose for this evidence was to prejudice the jury and that it may well have had that effect,” wrote Justice Joseph Albright. “We condemn its introduction and find that it constituted plain error, there being no showing of relevance or probative weight.”
The court reversed Wyatt’s conviction.
