COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Kelsey, Hale y and Senior Judge Bumgardner Argued at Chesapeake, Virginia

TONY JERMAINE WALKER MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY v. Record No. 2931-08-1 J UDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER, III JANUARY 26, 2010 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF HAMPTON Wilford Taylor, Jr., Judge John E. Robins, Jr. (Office of the Public Defender, on briefs), for appellant. Erin M. Kulpa, Assistant At torney General (W illiam C. Mims, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Tony Jermaine Walker appeals his conviction of grand larceny of an automobile, Code § 18.2-95. He contends he was denied his ri ght of confrontation and the evidence was insufficient. Finding no error, we affirm the conviction. We examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the Common wealth, granting to it

all reasonable inferences th at are fairly deducible. See Haskins v. Commonwealth , 31 Va. App. 145, 149-50, 521 S.E.2d 777, 779 (1999). A 2004 Toyota Si enna minivan disappeared from the parking lot where the owners had left it. La ter the same day, the police found the defendant unconscious, in the van, stuck in a ditch. He clai med he had seen someone drop the keys, and he picked them up and drove the van away. At trial, the Commonwealth proved value of the stolen van by introducing a National Automobile Dealers’ Association (NADA) “blue book.” It listed four separate categories for the

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.- 2 - 2004 Toyota Sienna model. All 2004 Toyota Sienna vans in each category had a value of more than $200. 1

The defendant maintains introduction of the “b lue book” violated his ri ght to confront the witnesses against him as interpreted in Crawford v. Washington , 541 U.S. 36, 68 (2004), and

Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts , 129 S. Ct. 2527, 2531 (2009). He further maintains the evidence was insufficient because the proof of va lue only established the value of a class of vehicles but not the value of the pa rticular type of vehicle stolen. Code § 8.01-419.1 specifically authorized the us e of the NADA “blue book” to prove fair

market value of the vehicle stolen. 2 Riner v. Commonwealth , 268 Va. 296, 601 S.E.2d 555 (2004), noted that the United States Supreme Co urt had “indicated that business records are a type of hearsay ‘that by their na ture [are] not testimonial.’” Id. at 322-23, 601 S.E.2d at 570 (quoting Crawford , 541 U.S. at 56). Subsequently, Melendez-Diaz stated: “Business and public records are generally admissible absent conf rontation not because they qualify under an exception to the hearsay rules, but because — having been created for the administration of an entity’s affairs and not for the purpose of establ ishing or proving some fact at trial — they are

not testimonial.” Melendez-Diaz , 129 S. Ct. at 2539-40. See also Michels v. Commonwealth ,

1 The defendant was convicted under Code § 18.2-95: “Any person who . . . commits simple larceny not from the person of another of goods and chattels of the value of $200 or more . . . shall be guilty of grand larceny . . . .”

2 Code § 8.01-419.1 provides: Whenever in any case not otherwise specifically provided for the value of an automobile is in issue, either civilly or criminally, the tabulated retail values set forth in the National Automobile Dealers’ Associati on (NADA) “yellow” or “black” books or any vehicle valuation service regularly used and recognized in the automobile indus try that is in effect on the relevant date, shall be admissible as evidence of fair market value on the relevant date.- 3 - 47 Va. App. 461, 469, 624 S.E.2d 675, 680 (2006) (findi ng documents that are “not by their nature accusatory and do not describe any cr iminal wrongdoing of the defendant,” but “are a neutral repository of information,” do not consti tute “testimonial” hearsay for Sixth Amendment purposes). The NADA publication was a repository of info rmation compiled for uses other than in litigation; it was not accusatory. Guides prepared by the NADA are “intended . . . to assess the

values of various vehicles.” N.A.D.A. Services Corp. v. Bu siness Data of Virginia, Inc. , 651 F. Supp. 44, 47 (E.D. Va. 1986). As such, it was no t testimonial evidence, and its admission did

not violate the Sixth Amendment. The trial co urt did not err in admitting the Commonwealth’s

exhibit. The defendant argues that even if the NAD A book was admissible, the evidence was still insufficient to prove the stolen vehicle was worth $200 or more. He maintains the trial court did not identify the particular model of the vehicl e when relying on the va lues listed in the NADA book. He contends the evidence only established the value of a class of vehicles but not the value of the particular vehicl e stolen, which was an essent ial element of the offense. When referring to the values listed in the book, the trial cour t noted that all categories for the van had a value greater than $200. If all ca tegories of 2004 Toyota Siennas had values that exceeded $200, the specific type stolen had a value that exceeded $200. Thus, the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt thatthe stolen vehicle had to ha ve a value that exceeded $200. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction.

Affirmed.