COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Willis, Elder and Bray 

Argued at Richmond, Virginia 

KABONJI RAHSAAN ROANE 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 2988-99-2 JUDGE JERE M. H. WILLIS, JR. 

 MAY 8, 2001 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HANOVER COUNTY 

John R. Alderman, Judge 

 (Patrick R. Bynum, Jr., on brief), for 

appellant. Appellant submitting on brief. 

 (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General; Richard B. 

Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not 

designated for publication.

 On appeal from his convictions of robbery, in violation of 

Code § 18.2-58, and use of a firearm in the commission of a 

felony, in violation of Code § 18.2-53.1, Kabonji Rahsaan Roane 

contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence, at 

the sentencing phase of his trial, an exhibit displaying his prior 

convictions. Because Roane has failed to provide a record 

sufficient to allow us to determine the merits of his appeal, we 

dismiss the appeal. 
I. BACKGROUND

 During the sentencing phase of Roane's bifurcated trial, the 

Commonwealth submitted Exhibit 6, which contained a record of his 

prior convictions. Roane admitted that he had received timely 

notice of the Commonwealth's intent to introduce evidence of his 

prior convictions as required by Code § 19.2-295.1. However, he 

objected to the introduction of the exhibit on the grounds that 

(1) it did not include the date of each conviction, (2) it did not 

contain the name and jurisdiction of the court where each prior 

conviction was had, (3) it did not distinguish between felony and 

misdemeanor convictions, (4) it did not establish that the prior 

convictions were similar to any Virginia statutes, and (5) it was 

not properly authenticated. The trial court overruled Roane's 

objections and admitted Commonwealth's Exhibit 6 as evidence of 

his prior convictions. 

II. ADMISSIBILITY OF COMMONWEALTH'S EXHIBIT 6

 On appeal, 

the judgment of the lower court is presumed 

to be correct and the burden is on the 

appellant to present to us a sufficient 

record from which we can determine whether 

the lower court has erred in the respect 

complained of. If the appellant fails to do 

this, the judgment will be affirmed. 

Justis v. Young, 202 Va. 631, 632, 119 S.E.2d 255, 256-57 (1961) 

(citations omitted). Furthermore, we "must dispose of the case 

upon the record and cannot base [our] decision upon appellant's 

petition or brief, or statements of counsel in open court. We 

- 2 -
may act only upon facts contained in the record." Smith v. 

Commonwealth, 16 Va. App. 630, 635, 432 S.E.2d 2, 6 (1993) 

(citation omitted). 

 Although Commonwealth's Exhibit 6 was before the trial 

court, it is not contained in the record before us and the 

record contains no acceptable substitute. Commonwealth's 

Exhibit 6 is indispensable to a determination of the issues 

raised by Roane. Without it, we cannot review the trial court's 

ruling. Therefore, Roane has failed to present a record 

sufficient for appeal. 

 For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed. 

 Dismissed.

- 3 -