STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
 

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
 

Michael S. Gorbey, FILED Petitioner Below, Petitioner 

November 25, 2014 

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK vs) No. 14-0450 (Monongalia County 12-C-540) SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS 

OF WEST VIRGINIA 

State of West Virginia, et al., 

Respondents Below, Respondents 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Petitioner Michael S. Gorbey, appearing pro se, appeals the order of the Circuit Court of 

Monongalia County, entered January 30, 2014, that dismissed as moot his petition for a writ of 

habeas corpus, in which petitioner sought relief from a 2006 fugitive warrant that petitioner alleges 

is outstanding. Respondents, the State of West Virginia, the West Virginia Governor’s Office, and 

the Monongalia County Sheriff’s Office (collectively “Respondent State”), by counsel Laura 

Young, filed a summary response, and petitioner filed a reply. 

The 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. 

As background, we note that, on two prior occasions, we affirmed a circuit court’s rejection 

of petitioner’s various claims, based on his assertion that certain fugitive warrants1 against him 

were invalid. In Gorbey v. State (“Gorbey I”), No. 13-0400, 2013 WL 5988972, at *2 (W.Va. 

Supreme Court, November 12, 2013) (memorandum decision), we affirmed the Circuit Court of 

Kanawha County’s dismissal of petitioner’s complaint alleging, inter alia, malicious prosecution, 

abuse of process, gross negligence, negligence per se, and deliberate indifference. In Gorbey v. 

Monongalia County, (“Gorbey II”), No. 13-1131, 2014 WL 4289412, at *3 (W.Va. Supreme 

Court, August 29, 2014) (memorandum decision), the Circuit Court of Monongalia County 

granted summary judgment to Monongalia County on petitioner’s claims for malicious 

prosecution, malicious arrest, harassment, unlawful arrest, unlawful incarceration, and destruction 

1 In Gorbey v. State, No. 13-0400, 2013 WL 5988972, at *1 (W.Va. Supreme Court, 

November 12, 2013) (memorandum decision), we noted that “petitioner’s criminal history spans 

twenty years, involving numerous occasions, in several states.” (internal quotations and citations 

omitted) (emphasis added). 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of property. In affirming the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment, we noted that petitioner 

took inconsistent positions on whether a fugitive warrant from 2006 was pending. Id. at *2. 

On August 16, 2012, petitioner filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus in 

which petitioner sought relief from the 2006 fugitive warrant which he believes is still outstanding. 

On January 30, 2014, the circuit court dismissed the petition as moot after making the following 

findings: 

At the request of the Office of Attorney General of the State of West 

Virginia on behalf of the Office of the Governor of West Virginia, the Prosecuting 

Attorney of Monongalia County filed a Response to this Petition. The Prosecuting 

Attorney inquired into the status of any outstanding warrants or detainers for 

Petitioner.[2

] The Prosecuting Attorney was assured by the Monongalia County 

Sheriff’s Department that there is currently no fugitive from justice warrants or 

Governor’s Rendition Warrants pending or outstanding involving Petitioner[.] 

In addition, R.C. Adkins of the Monongalia County Sheriff’s Office[3

] 

submitted a memo reiterating that the Sheriff’s Office holds no detainer, fugitive 

from justice warrant, any other warrant, or any other type of authorization to 

apprehend the Petitioner.[4

] 

Petitioner appeals the circuit court’s January 30, 2014, order dismissing his petition as 

moot. We apply the following standard of review in habeas cases: 

In reviewing challenges to the findings and conclusions of the circuit court in a 

habeas corpus action, we apply a three-prong standard of review. We review the 

final order and the ultimate disposition under an abuse of discretion standard; the 

underlying factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard; and questions of 

law are subject to a de novo review. 

Syl. Pt. 1, Mathena v. Haines, 219 W.Va. 417, 633 S.E.2d 771 (2006). In addition, “[m]oot 

questions or abstract propositions, the decision of which would avail nothing in the determination 

of controverted rights of persons or of property, are not properly cognizable by a court.” Syl. Pt. 1, 

2 Currently, petitioner is incarcerated by the United States for convictions he received in 

the District of Columbia, including carrying a dangerous weapon, unlawful possession of 

ammunition, possession of an unregistered firearm, use and/or transportation of explosives for an 

unlawful purpose, and attempted manufacture of a weapon of mass destruction. See Gorbey v. 

United States, 54 A.3d 668, 677, 699-707 (D.C. 2012). 

3 In her response to the petition, the Prosecuting Attorney indicated that Mr. Adkins is the 

Sheriff’s Office’s chief operating officer. 

4 The memorandum was dated January 28, 2014.
 

2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State ex rel. McCabe v. Seifert, 220 W.Va. 79, 640 S.E.2d 142 (2006) (Internal quotations and 

citations omitted.). 

On appeal, petitioner asserts that he is a victim of “a governmental conspiracy.” 5 

Respondent State counters that the circuit court’s dismissal of the petition as moot should be 

affirmed because the fugitive warrant petitioner complains of is simply not pending. We agree 

with Respondent State.6 At the request of the Governor and the Attorney General, the Monongalia 

County Prosecuting Attorney filed a response to the petition and made inquiries with the 

Monongalia County Sheriff’s Office. The result of those inquiries was a January 28, 2014, 

memorandum from the Sheriff’s Office that it possesses “no detainer, Fugitive from Justice 

warrant(s) or any other warrants or holds authorizing the apprehension of [petitioner.]” We are 

satisfied that the 2006 fugitive warrant is not outstanding and conclude that the circuit court did not 

abuse its discretion in dismissing the petition as moot. 

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm. 

Affirmed. 

ISSUED: November 25, 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 

5 We note that petitioner has been determined to likely have a “persecutory type” 

delusional disorder. See Gorbey v. United States, 54 A.3d 668, 696 and n. 47 (2012). 

6 Respondent State also argues that (1) petitioner improperly filed his habeas petition 

because he is in the custody of another jurisdiction and is not subject to any West Virginia 

restraint; and (2) petitioner impermissibly asked for money damages against Respondent State in 

his petition because such relief is not available in habeas corpus. We do not address these 

arguments because we find that the circuit court’s determination that the case is moot is sufficient 

to affirm the dismissal. 

3