Cases

786 F.2d 1154 Jamesv.Bordenkircher 85-6674 United States Court of Appeals,Fourth Circuit. 3/24/86 1 S.D.W.Va. AFFIRMED

723 F.2d 904 Ward (James)v.Bordenkircher (Donald E.) NO. 83-6426 United States Court of Appeals,Fourth circuit. NOV 28, 1983 1 Appeal From: N.D.W.Va. 2 AFFIRMED.

[Cite as Bordenkircher v. Baker, 2023-Ohio-1770.] COURT OF APPEALS COSHOCTON COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TESSA BORDENKIRCHER JUDGES: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee Hon. William B. Hoffman, J. Hon. P

PER CURIAM: Our previous opinion of Crain v. Bordenkircher, 189 W.Va. 588, 433 S.E.2d 526 (1993) (Crain X), decided on July 16, 1993, dealt with the status of the operational and administrative plans for the Mount Olive Correctional Complex (MOCC). The MOCC is being built to correct the constitutional deficiencies that existed at the Moundsville Penitentiary and that were discussed in Crain v. Bordenkir

PER CURIAM: In our most recent opinion of Crain v. Bordenkircher, 192 W.Va. 416, 452 S.E.2d 732 (1994), we directed the respondents, Donald E. Bordenkircher, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al., to appear before this Court on March 7, 1995, to present a status report. On March 3,1995, the respondents filed a status report which sets forth the progress of the relocation of inmates from the West Virginia Penite

PER CURIAM. On November 4, 1992, this Court heard a status report concerning the construction of and transition to the new penitentiary at Mount Olive, as ordered by this Court in Crain v. Bordenkircher, 180 W.Va. 246, 376 S.E.2d 140 (1988) (Crain III). This status report was accompanied by a document entitled “Mount Olive Operational Procedures,” which provides administrative

454 S.E.2d 108 (1994) 193 W.Va. 63 Robert Carl CRAIN, et al., Petitioners Below, Appellees, v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, et al., Respondents Below, Appellants. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted September 14, 1994. Decided December 15, 1994. *109 James F

PER CURIAM: On November 29, 1994, pursuant to this Court’s order of July 14, 1994, the respondents, Donald E. Bordenkircher, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al., filed with this Court a status report on the progress of construction of the new state penitentiary, the Mount Olive Correctional Complex (hereinafter “MOCC”). The report provided information on final inspections, security and training, the a

447 S.E.2d 275 (1994) 191 W.Va. 583 Robert Carl CRAIN, et al., Petitioners Below, Appellants, v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al., Respondents Below, Appellees. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted June 28, 1994. Decided July 14, 1994.

433 S.E.2d 526 (1993) 189 W.Va. 588 Robert Carl CRAIN, et al., Petitioners Below, Appellants, v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al., Respondents Below, Appellees. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted June 1, 1993. Decided July 16, 1993. James F. Companion, Schrader,

376 S.E.2d 140 (1988) Robert Carl CRAIN, et al. v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. November 30, 1988. Rehearing Denied December 21, 1988. Schrader, Stamp, Byrd, Bryum & Companion, James F. Companion, William D. Wilmoth, Barbara L. Baxter, Wheeling, for appe

392 S.E.2d 227 (1990) Robert Carl CRAIN v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. April 13, 1990. *228 James F. Companion, William D. Wilmoth, Barbara L. Baxter, Schrader, Stamp, Byrd, Byrum & Companion, Wheeling, for Robert Crain. Roger

PER CURIAM: This proceeding was instituted in 1981 by inmates at the West Virginia Penitentiary, who contended that their confinement in that penitentiary constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Article III, § 5 of the West Virginia Constitution. It has been subject of a series of opinions and orders outlined in Crain v. Bordenkircher,

420 S.E.2d 732 (1992) 187 W.Va. 596 Robert Carl CRAIN, et al., Appellants, v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al., Appellees. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted June 2, 1992. Decided June 25, 1992. James F. Companion, William D. Wilmoth, Barbara L. Baxter, Schrader,

382 S.E.2d 68 (1989) Robert Carl CRAIN, et al. v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, et al. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. June 16, 1989. *69 Schrader, Stamp, Byrd, Byrum & Companion, James F. Companion, William D. Wilmoth, and Barbara L. Baxter, Wheeling, for Robert Carl Crain

342 S.E.2d 422 (1986) Robert Carl CRAIN, et al. v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, etc. No. 16646. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. March 27, 1986. *425 James F. Companion, William D. Wilmoth, Barbara L. Baxter, Schrader, Stamp, Byrd, Byrum & Companion, Wheeling, Daniel F. Hedges, Appalachian Research and Defense F

KEITH, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion in this case. The issues presented by the circumstances of this case are difficult and cannot be summarily disposed of by reference to Jenkins v. Bordenkircher, 611 F.2d 162, 1979, its companion case. Unlike the district court in Jenkins, the district court in t

286 S.E.2d 686 (1982) Jesse Willard WHITE v. Donald E. BORDENKIRCHER, Warden, WVSP. No. 15265. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. February 2, 1982. *687 James H. Young, Jr., Huntington, for appellant. Chauncey H. Browning, Atty. Gen., and Thomas N. Trent, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, for appellee. MILLER, C

BAILEY BROWN, Chief District Judge. These two appeals were consolidated for the purpose of considering whether it is a denial of due process for a state court in a criminal trial to decline to conduct a hearing outside the presence of the jury to determine the admissibility of identification evidence. We conclude that such a hearing is not constitutionally required and that the introduction of identification evidence in thes

PER CURIAM: On November 7, 1979, fifteen inmates of the West Virginia Penitentiary at Mounds-ville escaped from the prison. The appellant in this action, John A. Keenan, was one of those inmates. He was apprehended the following day near McMe-chen, West Virginia, was returned to the penitentiary and immediately placed in North Hall. On the same day that he was returned to the prison, the appellant was given a copy of the cha