CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The legal team for a man the state Supreme Court ruled could withdraw his guilty pleas related to the 2001 rape and robbery of an elderly Harrison County woman believes there is little harm in a hold on process on the condition that it is not lengthy.
Last week, Attorney General Patrick Morrisey’s office filed a Motion to Stay the mandate so they could have more time to research the possibility of appealing the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
On Tuesday, a response was filed on behalf of Joseph Buffey stating “while understandably reluctant to consent to any relief that may prolong his wrongful incarceration, [Buffey] accepts the representation made by counsel for Respondent that it seeks the present stay only to make a good-faith determination…rather than to further delay the administration of justice.”
In the response, it was requested that a stay not exceed 30 days due to the fact Buffey has remained incarcerated through the entire process and will remain incarcerated after the finalization and further Harrison County Circuit Court proceedings.
He is currently serving a 70 years sentence in prison after entering guilty pleas to the 2001 crime, but attorney Allan Karlin successfully argued to the state Supreme Court last month that he received poor legal counsel, was pressured into the statement and was not provided exculpatory DNA evidence that later convicted another man.
(Read Buffey’s response here.)
The unanimous decision from the justices was based on the “Brady Rule,” which states that those convicted of a crime are entitled to evidence beneficial to the case before a trial.
Brady has never been explicitly ruled on by the Supreme Court when it comes to the plea deal process.
For that reason, Buffey’s team agreed with the state’s assertion that the highest court may want to settle the matter.
However, they disagree with the state’s claim that there is a “significant possibility of reversal” by the Supreme Court.
(Read the state’s request for a stay here.)
“Given this [state] Court’s well-reasoned and unanimous opinion, the compelling facts, and undisputed materiality of the suppressed DNA evidence…it in fact is highly likely the Supreme Court would affirm this Court’s reasoned judgement.”
The response was filed by Nina Morrison, an attorney with the New York-based Innocence Project.
A ruling to grant the stay must come from the state Supreme Court before the end of the week, when their ruling on Buffey’s case was scheduled to be finalized.