Gerald Titus

In re M.B. (2026). The Court held that M.B. (child) should remain with his Amish foster parents and affirmed the circuit court’s decision to deny his removal. The guardian ad litem argued that the placement was inappropriate because it might limit his education, medical care, and exposure to modern life, and could prevent a permanent adoptive future. The court rejected these arguments, explaining that West Virginia law requires judges to decide custody and placement based on the best interests of the child, not any single factor. It found that M.B. was in a safe, loving home with his biological siblings and receiving appropriate care, so removal was not justified.

In re A.E. (2026) Case was before Justice Titus III. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals (Court) ruled that the circuit court could not require DHS to pay transportation costs for post-permanency visits between A.E. and his psychological parents. The Court said there was no law allowing the state to fund travel for a disabled child over 18. It rejected fairness arguments from the psychological parents, emphasizing that courts cannot expand DHS obligations beyond what the law allows. 

In re S.S. and L.S. (2026). Justice Titus III dissented, disagreeing with the Court’s quick decision. He argued the father’s concerns that the mother might take the children to the Philippines deserved oral argument and a full written opinion, not a short memorandum. Titus said the issues were serious enough to require more thorough review, including careful consideration of the father’s requests about passports, international travel, and control over the children. He believed the Court should give these concerns more attention rather than simply affirming the lower court’s ruling.

State v. Thompson (2026) Case was before Justice Titus III. The Court decided that statements Thompson made to the police could be used at trial because they were not “testimonial,” so the Confrontation Clause did not prevent them. After getting upset over drugs hr bought, Thompson had struck returns the drug dealers home and struck them with a pistol, shot Salaam Jr., claiming self-defense. The jury heard evidence including a tattoo, a 911 call, and officer testimony, and was instructed on murder and felony murder. The Court said trial courts have wide control over evidence and followed rules about relevance, fairness, and excited utterances. Thompson’s conviction for felony murder and life without parole was upheld.

State ex rel. West Virginia v. Cuomo (2026). Case was before Justice Titus III. The Court reversed the circuit court’s dismissal of the indictment against Smogonovich for failing to register as a sex offender. The Supreme Court found that the lower court used the wrong procedure by weighing evidence before trial, which is the jury’s job, not the judge’s. The circuit court improperly looked at the defendant’s prior Ohio juvenile adjudication and decided it was not a “conviction” under SORA. Because the State would lose its ability to prosecute, the Court issued a writ of prohibition, stopping the dismissal.

During a press conference, Justice Titus III stated he is “committed to the rule of law in applying the law as it is written” and emphasized that he believes “it’s critical that the court remain impartial and ensure fairness for all parties.” Titus also expressed that he looks forward to “applying [his] full legal abilities and training to reach the right result under the law” and described his appointment as a solemn duty and opportunity to serve the people of West Virginia.

In announcing his appointment to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, Gerald M. Titus III said, “The Supreme Court plays an essential role in safeguarding the rule of law and upholding the rights of West Virginians,” and expressed that he looks forward to serving “with integrity and unwavering respect for our state’s judicial institutions.” Titus also stated, “The significance of this appointment is profound. It is a privilege to have the opportunity to contribute to the fair and impartial administration of justice in our state.”