Cobb v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 27 April 2021 |
| Docket Number | Record No. 0180-20-1 |
| Parties | SENORA LUCHILLE COBB, S/K/A SENORA LUCHILE COBB v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA |
| Court | Virginia Court of Appeals |
UNPUBLISHED
Present: Judges Petty, O'Brien and Senior Judge Clements
Argued by videoconference
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK
1
J. Barry McCracken, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Mason D. Williams, Assistant Attorney General (Mark R. Herring, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.
The trial court convicted appellant of child abuse or neglect, in violation of Code § 18.2-371.1(A). Asserting that she was illegally detained, appellant contends the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress statements she made to police on July 28, 2018. Appellant also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to prove that she caused or suffered her child to sustain serious bodily harm. We affirm her conviction.
"In accordance with familiar principles of appellate review, the facts will be stated in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party at trial." Gerald v. Commonwealth, 295 Va. 469, 472 (2018) (quoting Scott v. Commonwealth, 292 Va. 380, 381 (2016)). In doing so,we discard any of appellant's conflicting evidence and regard as true all credible evidence favorable to the Commonwealth and all inferences that may reasonably be drawn from that evidence. Id. at 473. On July 28, 2018, Norfolk firefighter Carlton Twiford responded to an apartment in Norfolk for a nonresponsive child call. When he arrived outside, an unknown man led him to the apartment where the child was located. Several adults were in the apartment, and appellant acknowledged that she was the child's mother. Appellant pointed to seventeen-month-old A.C., who was lying on a tile floor wearing only a diaper. A.C. was cold to Twiford's touch and unresponsive. A.C. was not breathing well; he had agonal respirations. When Twiford picked up A.C., "he was completely limp." Twiford carried A.C. to a waiting ambulance "to start vital care," and appellant followed. Twiford noted that appellant was not crying and did not appear panicked. A.C. was transported to the hospital by ambulance. During the transport to the hospital, A.C. had to be intubated because he was not breathing.
Norfolk Police Detectives Jennifer Barron and Michael Chafee went to the hospital that day for an unresponsive child complaint and immediately checked on A.C. The detectives noted that A.C. was unconscious, with a collar on his neck, and several tubes in his nose. Detective Barron took several photographs depicting A.C.'s condition that day. The detectives then met with appellant at the hospital to conduct a preliminary investigation into what had happened to A.C. Detective Chafee testified that this Two Child Protective Services workers accompanied the detectives.
They interviewed appellant in a fifteen-by-ten foot, windowless waiting room that was arranged "like a lounge" with five or six chairs and two or three end tables. Although a uniformed patrol officer was present outside of the room when the detectives arrived, the detectiveslet the uniformed officer leave. The door to the room was closed, but not locked. Detective Chafee estimated that the conversation lasted forty minutes.
The detectives identified themselves as being with the Norfolk Police Department and accompanied by CPS and stated that they "were interested in finding out what happened" to A.C. Appellant was not forced or threatened to speak with the detectives at the hospital and was not told she could not leave. After the detectives explained why they were there, appellant spoke with them. Appellant was free to leave at any time.
Appellant told the detectives that A.C. and his brothers played "roughly," and A.C.'s older brother also reportedly hit A.C. with a toy fire truck. In addition, when he had temper tantrums, A.C. would throw himself down and bang his head on the concrete floor. Appellant also stated that earlier that day, she had let A.C. go to a playground with two girls from the neighborhood for about an hour.2 Appellant stated that A.C. was "normal" when he went to the park, but when he returned, he acted tired, wanted to sleep, and was not "himself." Unsure whether A.C. needed medical attention, appellant took him to an upstairs neighbor, who recommended that they call 911.
Child abuse pediatrician Dr. Amber Shipman was qualified by the trial court as an expert in child abuse pediatrics. When she examined A.C. on July 29, 2018, he was in critical condition. A.C. had been intubated to help him breathe. A.C. had bleeding in several parts of his brain, so providers had placed a bolt in A.C.'s head to relieve pressure on his brain from the bleeding. In addition, A.C. required low blood pressure support, which Dr. Shipman attributed to his body's inability to regulate his blood pressure because of the numerous brain injuries. Dr. Shipman noted three areas of bruising on A.C.'s forehead and bruises on his scalp above his left ear, on his left lower abdomen, and on the pinna of his right ear. A.C.'s forehead bruises were also swollen,indicating that he was bleeding into the tissue from blunt-force trauma. A.C. had two abrasions on his abdomen, another on his upper outer right thigh, multiple abrasions on his left eye and upper left eyelid, and one below his left eye from his cheek to his nose. A.C.'s liver enzymes were also elevated, indicating a contusion, or bruising of the liver.
When A.C. arrived at the hospital, he weighed fourteen pounds and eight ounces. Dr. Shipman testified that at this weight, A.C. was considered severely malnourished. A.C. was very small, had minimal underlying fat, very little muscle tone, and excess skin folds under his arms and legs, which is often seen in malnourished children. Despite Dr. Shipman's numerous attempts to contact appellant to gather information, she was unsuccessful in reaching appellant.
Family service worker Tynisha Brewer was assigned to A.C.'s case and went to the hospital on July 29, 2018. Brewer noted that A.C. had a surgical bolt in his head, three large knots across his forehead, and numerous bruises across his face, arms, chest, legs, and back. Brewer also noted that A.C. had "hanging skin" along his thighs and his collar bones were visible. Brewer did not see appellant at the hospital on July 29, 2018. A.C.'s foster care case was assigned to family service worker Alisa Gaskins on July 30, 2018. Gaskins noted that A.C. had tubes coming out of different parts of his body "to assist him" and he was unresponsive. The hospital room had very little light, and visitors could not touch A.C. or make excessive noise. Appellant contacted Gaskins to ask about her two older children, who also had been placed in foster care, but did not inquire about A.C. or his condition.
A.C. remained in the hospital for a month and two days. After he was discharged from the hospital, A.C. went to live with a foster family in Chesapeake. A.C.'s condition improved once he was placed in the foster home. Appellant was arrested on August 8, 2018 and charged with child abuse or neglect.
Following her arrest, appellant moved to suppress the statements she made to the detectives during her interview at the hospital.3 Appellant argued that the circumstances of the interview amounted to a custodial interrogation and the detectives had not advised her of her Miranda4 rights. The Commonwealth responded that appellant was not in custody at the time of the interview.
At the suppression hearing, appellant testified that the hospital chaplain had escorted her to the waiting room. At some point, the chaplain left, and two uniformed police officers entered the room. The uniformed officers asked appellant a few demographic questions, then told her to remain in the room. Appellant stated that the officers left the room and closed the door; she waited for about thirty minutes until the detectives arrived. At one point, appellant "stuck her head out the door" and asked to use the restroom, but the officer told her no that she "had to remain in the room until the detectives came" to speak with her. Appellant stated that the officers were standing on either side of the door. Appellant agreed that the officers did not tell her she was under arrest or handcuff her. The trial court denied the motion to suppress appellant's hospital interview statements. The trial court found that the interview was not custodial, that the detectives were just investigating to learn what happened to the child. The trial court further found that appellant was free to leave.
At the subsequent bench trial, appellant argued that the evidence did not indicate that she caused or permitted serious injury to A.C. The trial court overruled appellant's motions to strike, convicted her of child abuse or neglect, and sentenced her to three years and six months' imprisonment, with three years suspended. This appeal follows.
"In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress based on the alleged violation of an individual's Fourth Amendment rights, we consider the evidence introduced at both the suppression hearing and the trial." Bagley v. Commonwealth, 73 Va. App. 1, 12-13 (2021) (citing Beasley v. Commonwealth, 60 Va. App. 381, 385 n.1 (2012)). This Court examines the trial court's application of the law de novo; however, we defer to the trial court's findings of fact. Id. at 13. Appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress her hospital interview statements because she was illegally detained and the detectives did not have reasonable and articulable suspicion of illegal activity.
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals...
To continue reading
Request your trial