STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

FILED State of West Virginia, August 29, 2014 Plaintiff Below, Respondent RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

OF WEST VIRGINIA
 vs) No. 13-0648 (Webster County 13-F-8) 

Ronald Ward,
 

Defendant Below, Petitioner
 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Ronald Ward’s appeal, by counsel Michael W. Asbury Jr., arises from the 

Circuit Court of Webster County, which sentenced petitioner to four to twenty years in prison by 

order entered on September 13, 2013 for his guilty plea to felony possession of substances to be 

used as precursor to manufacture methamphetamine under West Virginia Code § 60A-10-4(d). 

The State, by counsel Laura Young, filed a response in support of the circuit court’s order. 

Petitioner argues that the circuit court erred by enhancing his sentence under West Virginia Code 

§ 60A-4-408. 

This 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. 

In January of 2013, petitioner was indicted on three counts: (1) felony conspiracy; (2) 

felony operation of a clandestine lab; and (3) felony possession of substances to be used as 

precursor to manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of West Virginia Code § 60A-10-4(d). 

In April of 2013, petitioner pled guilty to Count Three under an agreement with the State that the 

other two counts would be dismissed and that the State would make a non-binding 

recommendation to the circuit court to double petitioner’s sentence. The State based this 

recommendation on petitioner’s conviction in Nicholas County on a prior drug felony, and on 

West Virginia Code § 60A-4-408, which directs that “any person convicted of a second or 

subsequent offense under this chapter [60A], may be imprisoned for a term up to twice the term 

otherwise authorized[.]” When petitioner pled guilty, he acknowledged his understanding that 

the circuit court could possibly double his sentence as directed by West Virginia Code § 60A-10­

4(d), from two to ten year in prison to four to twenty years in prison. Ultimately, the circuit court 

sentenced petitioner to four to twenty years in prison, with credit for time served, by order 

entered in September of 2013. From this order, petitioner now appeals. 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner’s sole argument on appeal is that the circuit court erred by enhancing his 

sentence under West Virginia Code § 60A-4-408. Petitioner concedes that the circuit court had 

the discretion to enhance his sentence, but asserts that the enhancement was unwarranted and 

excessive. Petitioner argues that the circuit court did not consider mitigating factors, such as his 

cooperativeness with law enforcement and other authorities. 

We review sentencing orders under the following standard: 

“‘The Supreme Court of Appeals reviews sentencing orders . . . under a deferential abuse 

of discretion standard, unless the order violates statutory or constitutional commands.’ Syl. Pt. 1, 

in part, State v. Lucas, 201 W.Va. 271, 496 S.E.2d 221 (1997).” Syl. Pt. 1, State v. James, 227 

W.Va. 407, 710 S.E.2d 98 (2001). Moreover, “‘[s]entences imposed by the trial court, if within 

statutory limits and if not based on some [im]permissible factor, are not subject to appellate 

review.’ Syllabus Point 4, State v. Goodnight, 169 W.Va. 366, 287 S.E.2d 504 (1982).” Syl. Pt. 

6, State v. Slater, 222 W.Va. 499, 665 S.E.2d 674 (2008). 

We find no abuse of discretion by the circuit court. Our review of the record reveals no 

dispute that petitioner’s guilty plea to felony possession of substances to be used as precursor to 

manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of West Virginia Code § 60A-10-4(d), was his 

second offense under Chapter 60A of the West Virginia Code. Therefore, petitioner was 

sentenced within statutory limits. Nor do we find that the circuit court otherwise violated the 

West Virginia Code or Constitution, or that it based petitioner’s sentence on an impermissible 

factor. 

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm. 

Affirmed. 

ISSUED: August 29, 2014 

CONCURRED IN BY: 

Chief Justice Robin Jean Davis 

Justice Brent D. Benjamin 

Justice Margaret L. Workman 

Justice Menis E. Ketchum 

Justice Allen H. Loughry II 

2