Jackson v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 30 August 2022 |
| Docket Number | 1080-21-1 |
| Parties | JUAN ANTONIO JACKSON v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Virginia |
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS Christopher R Papile, Judge.
Daniel B. Winegard, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Justin B. Hill, Assistant Attorney General (Jason S. Miyares Attorney General; Sharon M. Carr, Assistant Attorney General on brief), for appellee.
Present: Judges Beales, Ortiz and Lorish Argued at Norfolk, Virginia.
DANIEL E. ORTIZ JUDGE.
A jury found Juan Antonio Jackson guilty of possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony. The Circuit Court of the City of Newport News sentenced Jackson to two years' incarceration. On appeal, Jackson contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. We disagree and affirm the trial court's judgment.
"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." Walker v. Commonwealth, 74 Va.App. 475, 481 (2022) (quoting Gerald v. Commonwealth, 295 Va. 469, 472 (2018)), appeal filed, No. 220378 (Va. June 24, 2022).
On November 21, 2018, Master Police Officer Frank Vito and Detective Joseph Woods were in an unmarked police van when they tried to stop a "tan or beige-color" vehicle on Marshall Avenue in the City of Newport News. The vehicle fled from the traffic stop into the Brookridge apartment complex. The officers did not chase the vehicle but later found it parked at the apartment complex, unoccupied, with its headlights on and the passenger door open. The vehicle was parked "in the driveway to [a] dumpster" that was surrounded by a fence on three sides. Detective Woods inspected the dumpster area between 5:12 p.m. and 5:14 p.m. to "make sure there was nothing discarded over there," and found nothing. At that time, "[i]t was getting dark" outside.
After locking the vehicle, the officers drove around the apartment complex until Detective Woods noticed Jackson walking toward the vehicle at 5:17 p.m. Jackson was about thirty or forty feet away from the unmarked police van. Officer Vito, who was wearing "plain clothes" and an outer equipment carrier displaying the word "police" and his badge, exited the van to speak with Jackson. As Officer Vito exited the van, Jackson "took off on foot." Officer Vito pursued Jackson and observed him run within ten or fifteen feet of the dumpster Detective Woods had previously inspected. Officer Vito did not see Jackson do anything by the dumpster area and then lost sight of Jackson, who was "much faster" than he was.
Detective Woods pursued Jackson from a different direction, caught up to Jackson, and followed him into an open field. Detective Woods saw Jackson "make a throwing motion with his right hand" and "something bright in color le[ave] his hand."[1] Soon after, Detective Woods told Jackson to "get on the ground," and Jackson did so. After detaining Jackson, Detective Woods observed that Jackson had "some clothes and a phone charger" underneath him. Detective Woods then searched the area where he saw the thrown object land and found a bag of ammunition several feet away from Jackson. The bag contained eleven .357 magnum cartridges.
Officer Vito instructed Detective B. Beggs, who arrived on scene to assist, to search for any evidence that may have been discarded during the foot pursuit. Detective Beggs searched the dumpster area at about 5:22 p.m. and immediately found a .357 caliber revolver lying on the ground near the dumpster's fence line. The revolver's muzzle was "plugged up with dirt" and pointed toward the fence. Detective Beggs observed "a drag mark indentation in the dirt . . . from the inside of the fence line towards the revolver." Detective Beggs further noticed that there was "dirt kind of sprinkled on the top of the barrel" and a "sliding mark under the fence." The revolver was loaded with Winchester .357 magnum cartridges, which matched some of the ammunition in the bag Detective Woods found. Detective Woods later successfully test-fired the revolver twice using the Federal .357 magnum cartridges also found in the bag.
Jackson was arrested and charged with possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony in violation of Code § 18.2-308.2.[2] At a jury trial, the Commonwealth presented testimony from the police officers and entered into evidence videos recorded by their body cameras. The videos show that the revolver was not on the ground in the dumpster area before the officers encountered Jackson. The videos also show that Jackson ran past the dumpster while pursued by Officer Vito. Finally, the videos show the location of the revolver in the dumpster area and Detective Woods' discovery of the bag of ammunition close to where he detained Jackson.
At the close of the Commonwealth's evidence, Jackson moved to strike the evidence, which the trial court denied. Jackson testified that he had been at the apartment complex for fifteen to eighteen minutes trying to find the apartment of people he had met on Facebook when he encountered the unmarked police van. Jackson admitted that he "took off running" as soon as the van door opened because somebody had recently been killed in the apartment complex, and he was "scared for [his] life." Jackson explained that he did not realize he was being pursued by police officers until he heard walkie-talkies. Jackson also testified that, once he heard the phrase "get on the ground," he "baseball slid[]" on the ground and let go of the items in his hands, including his white phone charger. Jackson denied any knowledge of the revolver or the bag of ammunition.
At the close of all the evidence, Jackson renewed his motion to strike, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to prove he possessed the revolver, which the trial court denied. The jury then found Jackson guilty of possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony under Code § 18.2-308.2, and Jackson was sentenced to two years' incarceration.[3] This appeal followed.
"In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, 'the relevant question is whether after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.'" Melick v. Commonwealth, 69 Va.App. 122, 144 (2018) (quoting Kelly v. Commonwealth, 41 Va.App. 250, 257 (2003) (en banc)). "This familiar standard gives full play to the responsibility of the trier of fact to resolve conflicts in the testimony, to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts." Raspberry v. Commonwealth, 71 Va.App. 19, 29 (2019) (quoting Burrous v. Commonwealth, 68 Va.App. 275, 279 (2017)). "In conducting our analysis, we are mindful that 'determining the credibility of the witnesses and the weight afforded the testimony of those witnesses are matters left to the trier of fact, who has the ability to hear and see them as they testify.'" Id. (quoting Miller v. Commonwealth, 64 Va.App. 527, 536 (2015)). Further, we are bound by a trier of fact's decision about "[w]hether an alternative hypothesis of innocence is reasonable" as it is a question of fact. Archer v. Commonwealth, 26 Va.App. 1, 12 (1997).
Thus, we will affirm the trial court's judgment unless it is ...
To continue reading
Request your trial