State of West Virginia v. Gavin Blaine Smith
Court
West Virginia Supreme Court
Decided
June 9, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Importance
55%
Case Summary
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2025 Term FILED _____________ June 9, 2025 No. 23-86 released at 3:00 p.m. C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK _____________ SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, Plaintiff Below, Respondent, v. GAVIN BLAINE SMITH, Defendant Below, Petitioner. ________________________________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kanawha County The Honorable Kenneth Ballard, Judge Criminal Action No. 22-F-130 VACATED AND REMANDED ________________________________________________ Submitted: January 28, 2025 Filed: June 9, 2025 Matthew Brummond, Esq. John B. McCuskey, Esq. Public Defender Services Attorney General Appellate Advocacy Division Michael R. Williams, Esq. Charleston, West Virginia Solicitor General Attorney for the Petitioner Andrea Nease Proper, Esq. Deputy Attorney General Office of the Attorney General Charleston, West Virginia Attorneys for the Respondent JUSTICE BUNN delivered the Opinion of the Court. JUSTICE ARMSTEAD dissents and may write separately. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. “It is the duty of the jury to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused in accordance with the evidence introduced at the trial and it must not concern itself with matters of possible parole or probation.” Syllabus point 1, State v. Lindsey, 160 W. Va. 284, 233 S.E.2d 734 (1977). 2. “Outside the context of cases involving a recommendation of mercy, it is improper for either party to refer to the sentencing possibilities of the trial court should certain verdicts be found or to refer to the ability of the trial court to place a defendant on probation.” Syllabus point 7, State v. Guthrie, 194 W. Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995). i BUNN, Justice: Petitioner Gavin Smith appeals his convictions for three counts of first- degree murder, one count of second-degree murder, and one count of using or presenting a firearm during the commission of a felony, all stemming from the shooting deaths of Mr. Smith’s stepfather, mother, and two younger brothers. On appeal, Mr. Smith asserts that the circuit court erred by improperly informing the jury that if it convicted him of first- degree murder, the most serious degree of homicide at issue, Mr. Smith would be parole eligible after fifteen years and that he was prejudiced by this error. We agree and find that, under the circumstances of this case, the circuit court committed reversible error when it improperly informed the jury of the penalty and parole possibility for Mr. Smith, who was under the age of eighteen years old at the time of the alleged first-degree murders. Therefore, we vacate Mr. Smith’s convictions and the circuit court’s sentencing order, and remand for a new trial. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In December 2020, Timothy Saunders, Mr. Smith’s grandfather, discovered Mr. Smith’s mother, stepfather, and two younger brothers shot to death in their home.1 Mr. 1 Because we are vacating and remanding for a new trial, we recite the facts from the record of the original trial for purposes of appeal only. We make no further conclusions regarding these facts. 1 Saunders did not find Mr. Smith at the home and contacted law enforcement. After locating Mr. Smith at the home of his girlfriend’s grandmother, law enforcement arrested and charged Mr. Smith in connection with the deaths of his family members. Mr. Smith’s girlfriend, Rebecca Walker, was also charged in connection with the deaths. Prior to Mr. Smith’s indictment, Ms. Walker entered into a binding plea agreement where she agreed to demand transfer from juvenile proceedings to adult criminal jurisdiction. Upon entry of
Case Details
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 9, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools
Case Summary
Summary of the key points and legal principles
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA
January 2025 Term FILED
_____________
June 9, 2025
No. 23-86 released at 3:00 p.m.
C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK
_____________ SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
OF WEST VIRGINIA
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA,
Plaintiff Below, Respondent,
v.
GAVIN BLAINE SMITH,
Defendant Below, Petitioner.
________________________________________________
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kanawha County
The Honorable Kenneth Ballard, Judge
Criminal Action No. 22-F-130
VACATED AND REMANDED
________________________________________________
Submitted: January 28, 2025
Filed: June 9, 2025
Matthew Brummond, Esq. John B. McCuskey, Esq. Public Defender Services Attorney General Appellate Advocacy Division Michael R. Williams, Esq. Charleston, West Virginia Solicitor General Attorney for the Petitioner Andrea Nease Proper, Esq. Deputy Attorney General Office of the Attorney General Charleston, West Virginia Attorneys for the Respondent
JUSTICE BUNN delivered the Opinion of the Court. JUSTICE ARMSTEAD dissents and may write separately. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
1. “It is the duty of the jury to determine the guilt or innocence of the
accused in accordance with the evidence introduced at the trial and it must not concern
itself with matters of possible parole or probation.” Syllabus point 1, State v. Lindsey, 160
W. Va. 284, 233 S.E.2d 734 (1977).
2. “Outside the context of cases involving a recommendation of mercy,
it is improper for either party to refer to the sentencing possibilities of the trial court should
certain verdicts be found or to refer to the ability of the trial court to place a defendant on
probation.” Syllabus point 7, State v. Guthrie, 194 W. Va. 657, 461 S.E.2d 163 (1995).
i
BUNN, Justice:
Petitioner Gavin Smith appeals his convictions for three counts of first-
degree murder, one count of second-degree murder, and one count of using or presenting
a firearm during the commission of a felony, all stemming from the shooting deaths of Mr.
Smith’s stepfather, mother, and two younger brothers. On appeal, Mr. Smith asserts that
the circuit court erred by improperly informing the jury that if it convicted him of first-
degree murder, the most serious degree of homicide at issue, Mr. Smith would be parole
eligible after fifteen years and that he was prejudiced by this error. We agree and find that,
under the circumstances of this case, the circuit court committed reversible error when it
improperly informed the jury of the penalty and parole possibility for Mr. Smith, who was
under the age of eighteen years old at the time of the alleged first-degree murders.
Therefore, we vacate Mr. Smith’s convictions and the circuit court’s sentencing order, and
remand for a new trial.
I.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In December 2020, Timothy Saunders, Mr. Smith’s grandfather, discovered
Mr. Smith’s mother, stepfather, and two younger brothers shot to death in their home.1 Mr.
1
Because we are vacating and remanding for a new trial, we recite the facts
from the record of the original trial for purposes of appeal only. We make no further conclusions regarding these facts.
1
Saunders did not find Mr. Smith at the home and contacted law enforcement. After locating
Mr. Smith at the home of his girlfriend’s grandmother, law enforcement arrested and
charged Mr. Smith in connection with the deaths of his family members. Mr. Smith’s
girlfriend, Rebecca Walker, was also charged in connection with the deaths. Prior to Mr.
Smith’s indictment, Ms. Walker entered into a binding plea agreement where she agreed
to demand transfer from juvenile proceedings to adult criminal jurisdiction. Upon entry of
Case Information
Detailed case metadata and classifications
Court Proceedings
Document Details
Legal Classification
Similar Cases
Cases with similar legal principles and precedents
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 9, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools