Harry W. Jr., Petitioner Below, Petitioner
John T. Murphy, Warden, Huttonsville Correctional Center, Respondent Below, Respondent
Harry W. Jr.,  pro se, appeals the December 13, 2016,
order of the Circuit Court of Hampshire County denying his
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Respondent Marvin
Plumley, Warden, Huttonsville Correctional Center, by counsel
Robert L. Hogan, filed a summary response in support of the
circuit court's order. Petitioner filed a reply.
Court has considered the parties' briefs and the record
on appeal. The facts and legal arguments are adequately
presented, and the decisional process would not be
significantly aided by oral argument. Upon consideration of
the standard of review, the briefs, and the record presented,
the Court finds no substantial question of law and no
prejudicial error. For these reasons, a memorandum decision
affirming the circuit court's order is appropriate under
Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
was indicted by the Hampshire County grand jury on May 13,
2013, on three counts of sexual assault in the first degree;
eight counts of sexual abuse in the first degree; and three
counts of sexual abuse by a person in a position of trust to
a child. On November 14, 2013, pursuant to a plea agreement,
petitioner pled guilty to eight counts of sexual abuse in the
first degree, and the remaining charges in the indictment
plea agreement was binding on the circuit court insofar as it
limited the circuit court's ability to run
petitioner's sentences consecutively with regard to no
more than five of the eight counts to which he pled guilty.
Otherwise, sentencing was at the discretion of the circuit
the plea agreement, petitioner was free to argue for
probation or that his sentences should run concurrently.
However, at the November 14, 2013, plea hearing, the circuit
court made clear to petitioner that whether he received
probation was solely at the court's discretion. Moreover,
as a part of the plea colloquy,  the circuit court questioned
petitioner whether he was promised anything in exchange for
his guilty pleas that was not included in the plea agreement:
THE COURT: All right. Are you entering this plea today
freely, voluntarily, and of your own free will?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Did anyone pressure or intimidate you to enter
THE DEFENDANT: No, sir.
THE COURT: Did anyone promise you anything in exchange for
entering this plea?
THE DEFENDANT: No, sir.
circuit court also asked petitioner if he had any complaints
about his trial attorney. Petitioner responded, "No,
sir." Petitioner informed the circuit court that his
trial attorney did "a good job" for him. The
circuit court also discussed with petitioner the
constitutional rights that he would be giving up by pleading
guilty. Finally, the circuit court explained to petitioner
the purpose of a plea colloquy-using probation as an
THE COURT: And[, ] that's why we're going through all
of these questions and answers so that you don't come
back later and say, well, I didn't understand or I
didn't do this, I thought the [j]udge ...