Gordon v. Com.
| Decision Date | 11 October 1971 |
| Citation | 212 Va. 298,183 S.E.2d 735 |
| Parties | Welford GORDON, Jr. v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
J. Patrick Keith, Richmond (Paul & Smith, Richmond, on brief), for plaintiff in error.
James E. Kulp, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Andrew P. Miller, Atty. Gen., on brief), for defendant in error.
Before SNEAD, C.J., and I'ANSON, CARRICO, GORDON, HARRISON, COCHRAN and HARMAN, JJ.
The trial court, sitting without a jury, convicted Welford Gordon, Jr. of possession of heroin, a narcotic drug, in violation of Code § 54--488. From the judgment order sentencing him to serve three years in the penitentiary and to pay a fine of $100.00, we granted Gordon a writ of error.
The question for determination is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction.
The evidence shows that on December 15, 1969, at approximately 2:15 p.m., Detective Harding was driving east on Leigh Street approaching Third Street in the City of Richmond when he observed Gordon walking east on the north side of Leigh Street. As Harding drew even with him, Gordon stepped between two bushes 'and a concrete type fence and pulled out a brownish color, manila color envelope.' When he stepped back, Gordon saw the detective, raised his hand, said 'Hi, Harding' and began to walk west on Leigh Street with the envelope in his hand.
As Detective Harding made a U-turn in the intersection of Third and Leigh Streets, Gordon looked back at him and began running. He ran across the intersection of Second and Leigh Streets and south on Second, followed by Harding driving the wrong way down the one-way street. Harding stopped his car part way through the block and continued the pursuit on foot as Gordon darted to the east through an alleyway and then turned south again.
Harding was approximately 15 yards behind Gordon but narrowed the distance to five to seven yards when Gordon's flight was slowed by a closed gate at the rear of doctors' offices at Number 206 East Clay Street. When Gordon used both hands to open the gate Harding saw that he was still carrying the envelope. For three or four seconds thereafter Harding lost sight of Gordon as they ran along a passageway between the doctors' offices and around a brick wall standing in the center of the passageway at the front of the offices.
Emerging from the entrance, Harding saw Gordon running east along Clay Street but no longer saw the envelope. The detective followed Gordon across the intersection of Clay and Third Streets, and north on Third. He again momentarily lost sight of Gordon when the latter disappeared around the corner of a building but soon found him hiding behind a doghouse. Harding arrested Gordon, and, after searching the surrounding area unsuccessfully for the envelope, took him back to the police car on Second Street.
Harding introduced into evidence and testified from photographs which he had taken showing Gordon's route from the sidewalk on Leigh Street where he first saw Gordon to the doghouse where the pursuit ended. Harding testified that during the chase he had called to Gordon to halt and had fired a warning shot into the air but that Gordon continued to flee. He conceded that he did not see Gordon dispose of the envelope.
Detective Vann testified that he had been walking east in the two hundred block of East Clay Street when he received information that the police were chasing someone in the block. After delivering a message in a nearby building Vann returned to the street and, pursuant to information reported to him, observed an envelope lying on the grass behind the perforated wall extending in front of the doctors' offices east of the entrance to Number 206 East Clay Street. He acknowledged that Clay Street was a 'fairly busy' street and that he did not know how the envelope happened to be where he found it. Vann testified that after a lady unlocked a gate, he entered the enclosure behind the wall, picked up the envelope and shortly thereafter delivered it to Detective Harding.
Harding testified that this envelope, 'a pay envelope with Central National Bank on the front of it', was the 'same color, size and shape' as the envelope which he had seen Gordon pick up on Leigh Street.
The envelope delivered to Harding was found to contain 'narcotics works', consisting of a syringe, a needle, a bottle cap known as a 'cooker', and a stocking. The bottle cap, upon analysis, responded positively to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McMillan v. Com.
...proving the guilt of the accused to the exclusion of any other rational hypothesis and to a moral certainty." Gordon v. Commonwealth, 212 Va. 298, 300, 183 S.E.2d 735, 737 (1971) (quoting Brown v. Commonwealth, 211 Va. 252, 255, 176 S.E.2d 813, 815 Upon application of the aforementioned pri......
- McMillan v. Commonwealth
-
Powell v. Com.
...possessed the bag of cocaine and discarded it on the ground behind him when the officers approached. The facts in Gordon v. Commonwealth, 212 Va. 298, 183 S.E.2d 735 (1971), are distinguishable from the facts in this case. There, a police officer approached Gordon on a busy, public street w......
-
Maxwell v. Commonwealth, Record No. 2648-05-2 (Va. App. 4/3/2007)
...guilt must be established." Davis v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 96, 100, 570 S.E.2d 875, 877 (2002) (citing Gordon v. Commonwealth, 212 Va. 298, 300, 183 S.E.2d 735, 737 (1971)). "[S]uspicion or even probability of guilt is not sufficient." Gordon, 212 Va. at 300, 183 S.E.2d at Here, there a......