CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The state Attorney General is asking a ruling that would allow a Harrison County man to withdraw his guilty plea related to the rape an robbery of an elderly woman made in 2002 be put on hold.
Last month, the West Virginia Supreme Court made the determination, citing new, withheld DNA evidence indicating Joseph Anthony Buffey, 33, was not the attacker.
“The Court finds the State’s failure to disclose the favorable DNA test results obtained six weeks prior to (Buffey’s) plea hearing violated the Petitioner’s due process rights,” Chief Justice Margaret Workman wrote in the majority opinion.
Buffey is currently serving a 70 years sentence in prison after entering his guilty pleas, but attorney Allan Karlin –with the help of the Innocence Project– successfully argued Buffey received poor legal counsel, was pressured into the statement and was not provided exculpatory evidence.
Another man, Adam Bowers, was convicted of the crime using the same evidence and sentenced to 70 years in prison back in September.
The next step is for the Attorney General’s Office to determine if they want to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and the office are closely reviewing the Buffey case” wrote Press Secretary Curtis Johnson in an email to MetroNews. “We believe it presents an important question of criminal law. [Thursday’s] filing is simply intended to preserve the state’s ability to further review its options and determine whether or not to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
The motion is requesting that the hold last as long as a review by the highest court would take, believing “there is a substantial likelihood the Supreme Court of the United States will grant certiorari.”
Morrisey’s team also believes there is a significant possibility of reversal.
The justices in West Virginia based their opinion on the “Brady Rule,” which ruled withholding exculpatory evidence from a defendant on trial violates due process.
However, the AG’s office argues –much like Harrison County did– that because Buffey waived his right to a trial to enter into a plea deal, there is no Brady violation.
Should the the state not end up presenting its case to the Supreme Court for whatever reason, Buffey would then be allowed to vacate the pleas.
The Harrison County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office would then have to decide if it wanted to try the case again, which could result in a new deal, a new conviction or acquittal.
For this reason, the motion states that the state would suffer “Irreparable Harm” if the stay is not granted, any ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court afterward would “potentially be moot” or the proceedings in Buffey’s case “could be rendered an entirely wasted effort by a reversal by the U.S. Supreme Court.”
The motion was filed by Solicitor General Elbert Lin and Assistant Attorneys General Gilbert Dickey and Katlyn Miller.