Com. v. Jenkins

Decision Date17 April 1998
Docket NumberRecord No. 971537.
Citation499 S.E.2d 263,255 Va. 516
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH of Virginia v. Antwan R. JENKINS.
CourtVirginia Supreme Court

Daniel J. Munroe, Assistant Attorney General (Richard Cullen, Attorney General, on briefs), for appellant.

John D. Levin (Levin & Levin, on brief), Portsmouth, for appellee.

Present: All the Justices.

KEENAN, Justice.

In this appeal of convictions of first degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of murder, we consider whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that the victim died from gunshot wounds inflicted by the defendant.

On May 21, 1995, in the City of Portsmouth, Antwan R. Jenkins fired several gunshots at Kelly Jackson, inflicting three wounds. Jackson was later taken to a hospital where he received medical treatment for his injuries, including emergency surgery to repair damage to his colon. Four days later, Jackson died while still in the hospital.

Jenkins was indicted for unlawfully and feloniously killing Jackson, in violation of Code § 18.2-32, and for use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, in violation of Code § 18.2-53.1. During a jury trial, Dr. Faruk Presswalla, Deputy Chief Medical Examiner for the Commonwealth, testified that he performed an autopsy on Jackson and determined that Jackson had sustained three gunshot wounds. One bullet entered Jackson's back and moved through the skin and muscles of the back without penetrating any body cavity or vital organ. A second bullet, which entered Jackson's chest on the right side and fractured a rib, did not injure any vital organ or structure. The third bullet entered Jackson's abdomen, ultimately perforating his colon.

Dr. Presswalla testified that Jackson had aspirated vomit, as indicated by vomit found in Jackson's "airway" and in his lungs. Dr. Presswalla explained that the "vomit [went] up and down into the airway, into his lungs." When asked whether he had formed an opinion regarding the cause of Jackson's death, Dr. Presswalla stated that Jackson "died as a result of this aspiration following the gunshot wound to the abdomen."

Dr. Jeff Carney, a surgical resident who treated Jackson at the hospital, testified that on May 25, 1995, he entered Jackson's room and noted that Jackson was markedly pale and was sweating profusely. Dr. Carney then observed Jackson, who was lying on his back, begin vomiting. After rolling Jackson onto his side, Dr. Carney waited until the vomiting episode had ended. He then placed Jackson on his back and observed that Jackson "was in respiratory arrest or that he was not breathing." Shortly thereafter, Jackson died.

Dr. Carney testified that Jackson appeared to have been healthy before he sustained the gunshot wounds. Dr. Carney also stated that, at the time of his death, Jackson might have had "some type of seizure activity." Dr. Carney explained, "I am not a neurologist, I simply base [the statement regarding a possible seizure] on the opinion that [Jackson] had some spastic movements in his extremities." Dr. Carney stated that he could not offer an opinion whether Jackson actually had suffered a seizure.

Jenkins introduced into evidence a typewritten discharge summary, which was dictated and signed by Dr. Carney. On this document, a handwritten notation entered in the top margin of the first page stated:

Many Factors contributed to his death but all were result of Gun Shot wound Bowel injury and contamination Extensive laporotomy Intubated.

The record contains no testimony from any witness concerning the origin of this handwritten notation. When Jenkins' counsel offered the document in evidence, he did not request that the handwritten entry be excluded from the exhibit.

The jury found Jenkins guilty of first degree murder and fixed his punishment at 23 years' imprisonment. The jury also found Jenkins guilty of use of a firearm in the commission of murder and fixed his punishment for that offense at three years' imprisonment. The trial court entered judgment in accordance with the jury's verdict. The Court of Appeals awarded Jenkins an appeal from this judgment.

In the Court of Appeals, Jenkins argued that the evidence failed to show beyond a reasonable doubt that any of the three gunshot wounds he inflicted on Jackson was the cause of Jackson's death. The Court of Appeals agreed, holding that "the fact finder had no way of determining whether Dr. Presswalla meant that the aspiration was simply an unrelated event which coincidentally occurred after the gunshot wound, or a result of the gunshot wound with a causal relationship thereto." In an unpublished opinion, the Court of Appeals acknowledged the presence of the handwritten note on the discharge summary but held that, because "[t]here is no indication in the record of the source or author of this handwritten note.... we can only speculate as to its origin, authenticity, and authorship, and we are constrained by the record before us to disregard it." The Court of Appeals reversed Jenkins' convictions and dismissed the indictments.

The Commonwealth filed a petition for appeal in this Court pursuant to Code §§ 17-116.08 and 19.2-317(c).1 We awarded the Commonwealth an appeal.

The Commonwealth argues that Dr. Presswalla's testimony provided sufficient evidence to prove that Jackson died from the gunshot wounds inflicted by Jenkins. The Commonwealth also contends that the handwritten notation on the discharge summary constitutes further competent evidence to prove that Jackson died as a result of the gunshot wounds. In addition, relying on Gallimore v. Commonwealth, 246 Va. 441, 436 S.E.2d 421 (1993), the Commonwealth argues that even if Jackson had a seizure prior to his death, such an intervening event would not exonerate Jenkins because any such seizure would have been "put into operation" by Jenkins' acts.

In response, Jenkins argues that the Commonwealth failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jackson died from the gunshot wounds. Jenkins asserts that Dr. Presswalla did not state that the gunshot wounds caused Jackson to aspirate the vomit, and that Dr. Carney's testimony suggests that Jackson's death may have been caused by a seizure, rather than by the gunshot wounds. Thus, Jenkins contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. We disagree with Jenkins' argument and the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeals.

When a defendant challenges on appeal the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his convictions, it is the appellate court's duty to examine the evidence that tends to support the convictions and to permit the convictions to stand unless they are plainly wrong or without evidentiary support. Code § 8.01-680; Tyler v. Commonwealth, 254 Va. 162, 165-66, 487 S.E.2d 221, 223 (1997); Goins v. Commonwealth, 251 Va. 442, 466, 470 S.E.2d 114,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
107 cases
  • Romero v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • 25 Marzo 2014
    ...differ from the conclusions reached by the finder of fact at the trial.'" (alteration in original) (quoting Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 520, 499 S.E.2d 263, 265 (1998))). 7. On appeal, appellant's counsel emphasizes the fact that D.M. testified that she did not have sex with her f......
  • Rams v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • 26 Febrero 2019
    ...from the conclusions reached by the finder of fact at the trial." Clark, 279 Va. at 641, 691 S.E.2d 786 (quoting Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 520, 499 S.E.2d 263 (1998) ). Again, the appellate court will reverse the judgment of the trial court only if it is "plainly wrong or withou......
  • Stevens v. Commonwealth of Va..
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • 1 Febrero 2011
    ...280 Va. 100, 104, 694 S.E.2d 590, 593 (2010), and grant it “all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom,” Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 521, 499 S.E.2d 263, 265 (1998). However, whether a defendant invoked his right to have counsel present during custodial interrogation presents a......
  • Brown v. Com. of Va.
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • 22 Mayo 2018
    ...finder of fact at the trial." Clark v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 636, 641, 691 S.E.2d 786, 788 (2010) (quoting Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 520, 499 S.E.2d 263, 265 (1998) ). On review of a sufficiency challenge based on a motion to set aside the jury’s verdict, the key issue is "wheth......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT