COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Humphreys, Petty and Chafin Argued at Richmond, Virginia

CHARLES JONATHAN BEANE MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY v. Record No . 0465-18-2 JUDGE ROBERT J. HUMPHREYS APRIL 2, 2019 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE CIRCUIT COUR T OF HENRICO COUNTY Richard S. Wallerstein, Jr., Judge Taylor B. Stone (Janus & Stone P.C., on briefs), for appellan t. Alice Anne Lloyd, Assistant At torney General (Mark R. Herring , Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Charles Jonathan Beane (“Beane”) appeals the December 19, 2017 decision of the Circuit Court of Henrico County (“circui t court”) finding him guilty of aggravated sexual battery in violation of Code § 18.2-67.3(A)(1) and sentencing him to fifte en years’ incarceration, with twelve years suspended on conditi on of the successful completio n of twenty years’ probation. Beane argues that the circuit court erred by relying on evidenc e that was inherently incredible and inconsistent.
I. BACKGROUND On August 21, 2015, Beane’s estranged w ife, Kristen Beane (“mot her”), dropped off their daughter A.B. and her two br others N.B. and J.B. for a we ekend visit with Beane. Following this visit, A.B., then s even years old, disclosed to her mother that Beane had rubbed her vagina over her underwear a nd made her rub his genitals. A .B.’s mother took her to the local

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this op inion is not designated fo r publication.UNPUBLISHED- 2 - hospital for an examination, which resulted in a September 3, 2 015 interview of A.B. by a Henrico Department of Social Se rvices investig ator. During thi s interview A.B. stated that on the night of the incident she had been sleeping in the same bed as Beane while her brother J.B. slept on the floor nearby in a sleeping bag, and N.B. slept in the same room on the opposite side of a dividing wall. A.B. stated t hat Beane rubbed her vagina o ver her underwear and made her rub his penis. Beane denied the assault. He ad mitted that he and A.B. slept i n the same bed but denied any sexual activity had occurred. B eane also disputed several of the details in A.B.’s account, including where J.B. and N.B. w ere sleeping in the room and tha t A.B. was wearing a diaper rather than underwear. The cir cuit court found Beane guilty of aggravated sexual assault, dismissing the discrepancie s as inconsequential.
II. ANALYSIS “We consider the evidence and a ll reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom in the light most favorable to the Commo nwealth, the prevailing party at trial.” Crawford v. Commonwealth, 281 Va. 84, 97 (2011) ( quoting Bass v. Commonweal th, 259 Va. 470, 475 (2000)). While Beane correctly c ites this standard of review, he provides no legal authority to support his argument that, as a matter of law, the inconsistenc ies in A.B.’s testimony should have prevented the circuit court from finding the evidence sufficien t to convict him. Rule 5A:20 requires that an appellant’s ope ning brief contain, inter alia, “[t]he standard of review and the argument (including principles of law and authorities) relating to each assignment of error.” Rule 5A:20(e). Beane’s “failure t o provide legal argument and authority as required by Rule 5A:20(e) leaves us without a le gal prism through which to view his alleged error and, therefore, is significant.” Bartley v. Commonwealth, 67 Va. App. 740, 746 (2017). The failure being significant, so are the consequen ces for a material failure to follow the rules of the Supreme- 3 - Court—accordingly, we treat Beane’s assignment of error as waiv ed. Beane would do well to remember that “[a]ppellate cour ts are not unlit rooms where att orneys may wander blindly about, hoping to stumble upon a reversible error. If the parties beli eved that the circuit court erred, it was their duty to present that e rror to us with l egal authority to support their contention.” Fadness v. Fadness, 52 Va. App. 833, 851 (2008).
III. CONCLUSION Beane’s argument is waived by hi s failure to provide supporting legal authority as required by Rule 5A:20. Therefore, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. Affirmed.