# State v. Byers

> West Virginia Supreme Court · May 18, 1976 · 159 W. Va. 596

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8180445

## Case

- **Full name:** State of West Virginia v. Isaac Byers
- **Court:** West Virginia Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 18, 1976
- **Citations:** 159 W. Va. 596; 224 S.E.2d 726; 1976 W. Va. LEXIS 174
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Berry
- **Judges:** Berry, Flowers
- **Cited by:** 52 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8180445

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that “[t]his Court will not consider an error which is not preserved in the record nor apparent on the face of the record.”
- finding that driving under the influence does not have to be committed in the presence of the arresting officer
- finding that driving under influence does not have to be committed in presence of officer
- discussing arrests for traffic violations under Chapter 17C

## Opinion text

Berry, Chief Justice,
concurring:
I concur in the decision of this case, but do not agree that the giving of Instruction No. C offered by the State and given by the trial court over the objection of the defendant, constituted reversible error. The first sentence of this instruction clearly states the law with regard to the burden of proof. The last two sentences merely attempt to help the jury in arriving at a verdict after considering the evidence. There is no such thing as absolute certainty of proof. It has always been held that circumstantial evidence will support a conviction and the language in the latter part of the instruction merely tells the jury what degree of proof is necessary to support convictions. None of the language in this instruction is in conflict with the correct statement in the instruction that the State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.
I would agree with the Virgina Supreme Court wherein it approved of similar language in an instruction and held that such an instruction would not constitute reversible error. Nelson v. Commonwealth, 153 Va. 909 , 150 S.E. 407 (1929); Barnes v. Commonwealth, 190 Va. 732 , 58 S.E.2d 12 (1950); Bryant v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 310 , 53 S.E.2d 54 (1949).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8180445. Public record. Not legal advice.