Coates v. Commonwealth
| Docket Number | 0380-22-1 |
| Decision Date | 06 June 2023 |
| Parties | ROBERT LEE COATES v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA |
| Court | Virginia Court of Appeals |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF WILLIAMSBURG AND COUNTY OF JAMES CITY Michael E. McGinty, Judge Designate
Andrew M. Sacks (Stanley E. Sacks; Sacks &Sacks, P.C., on brief), for appellant.
Lauren C. Campbell, Assistant Attorney General (Jason S. Miyares Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.
Present: Judges Humphreys, Huff and Lorish Argued at Norfolk Virginia
Robert Lee Coates ("Coates") was convicted of the first-degree murder of his wife of 56 years, Irene Coates ("Irene"), and the use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. Coates argues on appeal that the Commonwealth's evidence was insufficient to prove the requisite intent for first-degree murder and that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion for a continuance the morning of trial. We affirm Coates's convictions.
BACKGROUND[1]
On May 4, 2019, David Freeman reported to the scene of a power outage to perform repairs. While there, he saw Coates and Irene sitting together outside of their house. Freeman eventually realized he would be unable to restore power to the house that day and informed the Coates's adult daughter, who was outside. She told Freeman that the house was her parents' and escorted him toward the house so he could inform Coates and Irene about the continued power outage. As Freeman approached the house, he saw Coates burst through the front door and say, "I just killed that bitch."[2] Coates then sat in a chair on his patio. Coates's daughter entered the house and ran out screaming seconds later. Freeman retreated and called 911.
Coates went to his neighbor's house and told his neighbor that he shot his wife with a shotgun, explaining that "he couldn't take it anymore." The neighbor ran to the Coates's house and saw Irene on the living room floor. The police arrived moments later and found Irene in a pool of blood with a baseball-sized hole in her upper thigh. An officer attempted to give aid but could not stop the bleeding. As medics arrived, the officer carried Irene down the road to meet them. The medics pronounced her dead soon after.
Coates was calm and cooperative with officers at the scene. One officer searched Coates and found a cell phone on his person. Officers found a shotgun shell in the living room and a shotgun in a bedroom closet. They also found a knife in the living room. The medical examiner determined from the autopsy that Irene died from the shotgun wound hitting her femoral artery and that the shotgun was fired from a far enough distance that the discharge did not leave soot or powder on her body.
Coates was charged with first-degree murder, Code § 18.2-32, and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony (first offense), Code § 18.2-53.1. Coates pleaded not guilty to all charges and opted for a bench trial. On the morning of trial in December 2020, Coates moved to continue his case. Coates's counsel explained that Coates had been transferred from jail to the hospital the day before. Coates had complained of "extremely elevated blood pressure," but the doctors did not diagnose him with any condition. He was released from the hospital after about three hours. Coates's counsel proffered that Coates was feeling "dizzy" with "headaches" and was not sure "if he [could] really sit through and hear and assist with his defense." The Commonwealth objected to a continuance because one witness had already died during the 18 months before trial, and nine others, including the medical examiner, were present at court to testify that morning. The court denied the motion to continue. It explained:
[I]t sounds like [Coates] was transported by the jail staff to the hospital last night and in a fairly relatively short period of time he was released by the medical personnel there from the hospital back to the jail. I don't discount the possibility that when you're facing a trial as serious as this one that there would be some anxiety and elevated blood pressure and those things, but at this point the Court is going to deny the motion to continue ....
At trial, in addition to the evidence summarized above, Coates testified in his own defense. He testified that he and Irene had "several arguments" in the days before her death and that she had been "real mad for several days" and nagging him constantly. On the day of the incident, Coates said Irene "was very smart-alecky, smart-mouthing." He testified that Irene cursed at him for several minutes then threatened him with a kitchen knife, saying, "I could cut you, you damn bitch." In response, Coates said, "you can't talk to me like that," then went to his bedroom and retrieved his shotgun. He entered the living room with his finger on the trigger. He testified that Irene dropped her knife and grabbed the shotgun, causing it to fire. He also said he did not remember returning the gun to the closet, going to his neighbor's house, or making any statements about the shooting. He argued that the shooting was an accident and the evidence failed to prove he acted with the requisite intent for first-degree murder.
The trial court found Coates's testimony "not very convincing" and found that his actions and statements proved he intentionally shot and killed Irene. It found that it could infer malice from Coates's use of a deadly weapon and statements after the shooting. And it found premeditation because Coates The court thought Freeman's testimony on the immediate aftermath of the shooting was "rather compelling," in that Coates showed no sign of surprise when he exited the house after the shooting and Freeman-not Coates, despite having a cell phone on him-called 911.
The court convicted Coates of first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. It sentenced Coates to 53 years of incarceration with 25 years suspended. Coates moved to set aside the verdict for insufficiency of the evidence and the denial of the continuance; the court heard argument then denied the motion. Coates appeals on the same grounds.
Coates argues in the alternative that the evidence was (1) insufficient to convict him of any offense because it created a reasonable doubt as to whether Irene's death was an accident; (2) insufficient to support a higher degree of homicide than involuntary manslaughter because his intent did not rise above criminal negligence; (3) insufficient to support a higher degree of homicide than voluntary manslaughter because the evidence created a reasonable doubt about whether he had malice; and (4) insufficient to support a higher degree of homicide than second-degree murder because the evidence created a reasonable doubt about whether he acted with premeditation. In other words, Coates argues the evidence cannot support any offense greater than involuntary manslaughter, or in the alternative, that if the Commonwealth proved he intended to shoot Irene, that the evidence fell short of that required for any degree of murder.
"On review of the sufficiency of the evidence, 'the judgment of the trial court is presumed correct and will not be disturbed unless it is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.'" Ingram v. Commonwealth, 74 Va.App. 59, 76 (2021) (quoting Smith v. Commonwealth, 296 Va. 450, 460 (2018)). We ask only whether "any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Id. (quoting Yoder v. Commonwealth, 298 Va. 180, 182 (2019)). If evidence supports the conviction, we are "not permitted to substitute [our] own judgment, even if [our] opinion might differ from the conclusions reached by the finder of fact at the trial." Chavez v. Commonwealth, 69 Va.App. 149, 161 (2018) (quoting Banks v. Commonwealth, 67 Va.App. 273, 288 (2017)).
"Intent may, and most often must, be proven by circumstantial evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from proven facts are within the province of the trier of fact." Sarka v. Commonwealth, 73 Va.App. 56, 67 (2021) (quoting Fleming v. Commonwealth, 13 Va.App. 349, 353 (1991)). "In determining a defendant's intent, '[c]ircumstantial evidence is as competent and is entitled to as much weight as direct evidence, provided it is sufficiently convincing to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt.'" Id. (quoting Coleman v. Commonwealth, 226 Va. 31, 53 (1983)).
Finally, we accept the factfinder's findings on witness credibility unless the testimony is inherently incredible. Nobrega v. Commonwealth, 271 Va. 508, 518 (2006). The factfinder is "entitled to disbelieve the self-serving testimony of the accused and to conclude that the accused is lying to conceal his guilt." Brown v. Commonwealth, 75 Va.App. 388, 414 (2022) (quoting Marable v. Commonwealth, 27 Va.App. 505, 509-10 (1998)).
The evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Coates murdered Irene, rather than committing manslaughter or an excusable accidental killing. Murder is a homicide committed with malice. Edwards v. Commonwealth, 68 Va.App. 284, 297 (2017). Malice exists "in the 'doing of a wrongful act intentionally, or without just cause or excuse, or as a result of ill will.'" Tizon v. Commonwealth, 60 Va.App. 1, 11 (2012) (quoting Dawkins v. Commonwealth, 186 Va. 55, 61 (1947)). Malice may be "inferred from the deliberate use of a deadly weapon unless, from all the evidence, there is reasonable doubt as to whether malice existed." Williams v. Commonwealth, 64...
To continue reading
Request your trial