×

​​Former W.Va. sen. Mike Maroney pleads guilty to indecent exposure

Photo by Emma Delk Former State Sen. Michael Maroney during a pretrial hearing for an indecent exposure charge on Wednesday.

MOUNDSVILLE — Former W.Va. Sen. Dr. Michael Maroney on Wednesday pleaded guilty to an indecent exposure charge for an incident that occurred in August 2024 at Gumby’s in Glen Dale where police said he was caught on camera committing an act of sexual gratification.

Maroney, appearing with his attorney Martin Sheehan, entered the plea without addressing the court, with Marshall County Magistrate Zachary Allman presiding. The plea was submitted during a pretrial hearing, as the case had been set for a jury trial on Wednesday, July 2.

Maroney was fined $250 and sentenced to time served. He had already spent seven days in jail for violating the terms of his bond after he refused to comply with a court order that required him to both attend and pay for drug rehab. He also spent 30 days under home confinement.

According to Marshall County Prosecuting Attorney Joe Canestraro, Maroney pleaded guilty pursuant to an Alford plea. This means that, without Maroney delivering a formal statement to the court before sentencing, the prosecution had enough evidence to convince “people to convict him.”

“Maroney thinks that it could be a worse sentence if he doesn’t plead guilty,” Canestraro said. “The agreement was that he would get the $250 fine and time served, and he’s served about seven days in jail and about a month on home confinement.”

Sheehan said that the plea bargain had been “pending for a long time” and had a “profound impact” on Maroney. Sheehan said they had reviewed videotape from Gumby’s, and while they were “not sure that (an act of sexual gratification by Maroney)” was performed on the tape, they decided to plead pursuant to Alford.

“Quite honestly, it’s a 30-minute tape,” Sheehan said. “Dr. Maroney is actively involved in playing video games — you see it from the back. There are some people in and out of the room, and nobody seems alarmed.”

Sheehan recounted that in the last five minutes of the tape, Maroney is “either uncomfortable” and “puts his hand in his pants.”

“People wanted to infer whatever they wanted to infer from that,” Sheehan said. “To me, the activity that is described there is very ambiguous, and that’s the situation. Once again, it’s about getting this matter resolved and trying to get it behind him.”

The plea agreement entered Wednesday does not deal with a separate driving under the influence of a controlled substance charge from an alleged Sept. 23, 2024, incident in which McMechen police officers stopped Maroney after he allegedly committed “numerous traffic infractions.” Police Chief Robert Shilling arrested Maroney on suspicion of driving under the influence.

Canestraro said the indecent exposure plea agreement does “not affect the DUI case whatsoever” and that it was still moving forward. A magistrate jury trial for the charge is scheduled for Wednesday, Sept. 3.

Sheehan also will represent Maroney in the DUI case. He said they had agreed with the prosecution to handle the cases separately.

“We think there were substantial issues in the DUI case, so the prosecutor and I agreed to handle those separately,” Sheehan said. “There are ongoing discussions about what’s admissible and what’s useful.”

Sheehan said he had seen “a lot of cases” involving drinking under the influence of alcohol, with the process of prosecution and collecting evidence for a DUI charge with alcohol being “down to a science.” He said a DUI with drugs could be “equally problematic,” but did not believe there was “any evidence of impairment” in Maroney’s case.

“Normally, if you’re positive for alcohol, we assume there’s impairment,” Sheehan said. “We don’t have that same thing with the substances involved here. In fact, we don’t think that the state can prove that at this time.”

Sheehan added that the DUI case was “much more complicated” for Maroney because he is a practicing physician. He stated they did not think there was “really evidence of any real impairment” to justify the DUI charge.

“We’ll get to that case, but we’ve agreed to detach them from each other, and that one has been pushed way down,” Sheehan said.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *

Starting at $2.99/week.

Subscribe Today