COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Bray, Overton and Senior Judge Duff 

MISAEL ROLANDO HERNANDEZ 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 2304-97-4 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON 

 OCTOBER 6, 1998 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY 

William T. Newman, Jr., Judge 

 (James E. Sullivan, on briefs), for 

appellant. Appellant submitting on brief. 

 (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General; Eugene 

Murphy, Assistant Attorney General, on 

brief), for appellee.1 Appellee submitting 

on brief. 

 Misael Rolando Hernandez (defendant) appeals the revocation 

of his suspended sentence by the Circuit Court of the County of 

Arlington. He contends on appeal that the circuit court was 

without jurisdiction to revoke the suspension because more than 

one year had passed from the end of the suspension period. 

Because we find that the record is incomplete, we cannot address 

defendant's assignments of error. For that reason, we dismiss 

his appeal. 

 On April 15, 1994, defendant was convicted of carrying a 

concealed weapon, in violation of Code § 18.2-308. He was 

sentenced to pay a one hundred dollar fine, but the sentence was 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 

 1Because both parties waived oral argument the case has been 

decided on the basis of their briefs and the record. 
- 2 - 

suspended for one year on the condition that he complete 40 hours 

of community service. The Commonwealth contends that because 

defendant failed to complete community service, an order to show 

cause was issued on July 25, 1994. The Commonwealth further 

contends a capias was issued on August 8, 1994. The Commonwealth 

suggests, without evidence, that neither service was completed 

because the defendant had absconded from the jurisdiction. On 

May 6, 1997, the General District Court of Arlington County 

revoked the suspended sentence and ordered him to pay the one 

hundred dollar fine. The order was appealed to the circuit 

court, which affirmed it. 

 "An appellant who seeks the reversal of a decree on the 

ground that it is contrary to the law and the evidence has the 

primary responsibility of presenting to this court, as a part of 

the printed record, the evidence introduced in the lower court, 

or so much thereof as is necessary and sufficient for us to give 

full consideration to the assignment of error." Lawrence v. 

Nelson, 200 Va. 597, 599, 106 S.E.2d 618, 620 (1959) (citations 

omitted). "When the appellant fails to ensure that the record 

contains transcripts or a written statement of facts necessary to 

permit resolution of appellate issues, any assignments of error 

affected by such omission shall not be considered." Rule 

5A:8(b). 

 Defendant contends the trial court should not have imposed 

the sentence because it was without jurisdiction to do so. The 
- 3 - 

record, however, is missing several important pieces of 

information critical to our determination of this issue. No 

transcript of the revocation hearing was provided. No copies of 

the capias or notice to show cause were provided. No transcript 

or statement of facts addressing the Commonwealth's attempts to 

serve defendant or defendant's attempts to avoid service were 

provided. 

 In short, the record is so wholly inadequate that meaningful 

appellate review is impossible. Because we cannot accept an 

appeal with such glaring factual deficiencies, we dismiss it. 

See Anderson v. Commonwealth, 13 Va. App. 506, 413 S.E.2d 75 

(1992). 

 Dismissed.