Shriver receives bond reduction
Howard P. Shriver, 34, of Shinnston, W.Va., appeared in Tyler County Circuit Court, before Judge Mark A. Karl, on May 23 to hear arguments on a motion to reduce his bond.
They were in court for a ruling on a motion for bond reduction. Shriver, who is charged in an 11-count indictment handed down by the February 2012 grand jury and has been incarcerated for two years, was recently released on a $50,000 bond. But shortly thereafter he had his bond revoked after going by his wife’s residence two times.
Judge Karl said he has received some medical records from different facilities were Mrs. Shriver had been treated and as of right now none of them show anything about her receiving any treatment for any mental disorder. He said they all are physical related, but if he receives anything new he would share them with the prosecution and defense.
Defense Attorney Jay Gerber told the court that his client had recently informed him that the North Central Regional Jail was going to start serving only two meals a day on weekends and his client was afraid it would interfere with his ability to take his medicine as prescribed. He also said he believed there had been some false allegations concerning the events which led up to Shriver having his bond revoked. He said upon his recent release his client was not driving the vehicle and therefore had no control of which route they took home. He said the elder Shriver, his father, was driving and they both were under the impression that his wife had moved from the residence and that is why they went that way. The intent was not to intimidate her. He asked the court to reinstate the bond at $50,000, which is the amount the family is able to produce.
Prosecutor Luke Furbee opposed the bond reduction from $100,000 to $50,000, saying he felt the current bond is appropriate.
Judge Karl said, “Shriver has been incarcerated for two years and I am going to allow the reduction in bond to its former amount of $50,000 and home confinement.” Karl asked if Shriver’s father was in court and Mr. Gerber said he was. Karl the spoke to Mr. Shriver and told him that when he takes his son home that he is to take the most direct route and he is not to go by the alleged victim’s home nor try to make any contact with her. Karl said, “Do you understand me?” Shriver said he did. Karl then said, “Because if you do, you will be sitting here before me in an orange suit for I will hold you in contempt of court. Do you understand me?” Shriver said he did. Judge Karl then ordered Shriver remanded to jail pending his release.
In other matters, Dwayne Ueltschey, 34, of 40031 St. Rt. 26, Woodsfield, Ohio, was in court for a hearing on a Rule 35 motion for a reduction of sentence to probation. Ueltschey appeared with his attorney, Public Defender John Gainer.
Ueltschey has been serving time in prison for crimes committed in Wetzel and Tyler counties. He had been sentenced in Tyler County to one to 10 years for forgery and uttering plus three years probation, which would run consecutively. He is also serving time from a separate sentence in Wetzel County which was to run concurrently with the Tyler sentence. On May 14, he filed a motion for a Rule 35 consideration.
Judge Karl noted that Ueltschey has has been incarcerated since May 31, 2013. Karl asked Prosecutor Furbee if he was aware of any write ups on Ueltschey since his incarceration.
Furbee responded, “Your Honor, I inquired concerning that issue and it appears he has not had any write ups or other disciplinary problems while he has been a member of the penal system. Therefore, pursuant to the plea agreement, the state does not object to the motion and that he be placed on three years supervised probation.”
Judge Karl asked Gainer if there was anything he wished to say. Gainer said, “He has not yet been released from Wetzel County, so he will not be eligible to be released today and that the two sentences do run concurrently.” Karl said, “Without objection from the state, I will grant the Rule 35 motion from this county and place him on three years supervised probation. Karl then went over the rules and regulations of probation with Ueltschey and the associated penalties if he were to violate probation. Warning him that if he returns to court for a probation violation, he could have probation revoked and returned to prison. Karl told the defendant that upon his release from Wetzel County to report within two days to the Chief Probation Officer John D. Lantz on the second floor of the Wetzel County Courthouse. He was also ordered to make restitution at an amount to be determined by the Tyler County Court. He was remanded pending his release from Wetzel County.
Gary J. Willey Jr., 33, of New Martinsville, was in court with his attorney, Shane Mallett, for a plea agreement hearing. Willey, who was charged with two felony counts of embezzlement, pleaded guilty through the plea agreement to a lesser offense of misdemeanor embezzlement.
Judge Karl asked Willey a series of question concerning his rights as a defendant. When satisfied with his answers and that he understood, Karl accepted his plea and had it entered into the record. He then sentenced Willey to one to 10 years in the West Virginia penitentiary for Men, which he suspended and placed him on one year of supervised probation. Karl went over the rules and regulation of probation with him and the associated penalties if he were to violate those terms and conditions. He ordered Willey to report to Chief Probation Officer John Lantz on the second floor of the Wetzel County Courthouse.
Prosecutor Furbee said, Willey has also made full restitution in the amount of $4,500 to Dave Simpkins and $200 to Roy Yoho. He was also ordered to pay the cost of his prosecution.
Brandon L. Rodriguez, 26, of New Martinsville, was back in court with his attorney, Gainer. Rodriguez was scheduled for a plea in his case of obtaining money under false pretenses. His attorney told the court that the last time they were in court he had $150 and now has $500. He said his client is still awaiting his income tax refund and as soon as he receives it, he will enter the plea.
Judge Karl continued the case until July 3. He asked Prosecutor Furbee if he had any objections to his bond continuing. Furbee had no objections.
Rodriguez was then allowed to leave and ordered back July 3.