COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Elder and Bumgardner 

Argued at Richmond, Virginia 

KELLI RENEE EDMONDS 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

 BY 

v. Record No. 2176-03-2 JUDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER, III 

 OCTOBER 5, 2004 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

 FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY 

Cleo E. Powell, Judge 

 Randy B. Rowlett (Gordon, Dodson, Gordon & Rowlett, on brief), 

for appellant. 

 Amy L. Marshall, Assistant Attorney General (Jerry W. Kilgore, 

Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. 

The trial court convicted Kelli Renee Edmonds during a bench trial of possession of 

marijuana and possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute on July 19, 2002.1

 She contends 

the evidence was insufficient to prove she possessed the marijuana or cocaine, or had the intent 

to sell the cocaine. For the following reasons, we affirm. 

On appeal, we view the evidence and the inferences fairly deducible therefrom in the 

light most favorable to the Commonwealth. Commonwealth v. Hudson, 265 Va. 505, 514, 578 

S.E.2d 781, 786, cert. denied, 124 S. Ct. 444 (2003). An investigation of a breaking and entering 

led police to suspect a man named Rico and to search his apartment. At Rico’s apartment police 

found drugs and learned from his sister that he had gone to the defendant’s apartment. Police 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 

1

 The defendant does not challenge her conviction of possession of marijuana on July 21, 

2002. 
 - 2 - 

had been watching that apartment for over two months and had observed apparent drug 

transactions outside the door. 

When the police arrived at the defendant’s apartment on July 19, Karon Jackson met 

them at the door. Rico was sleeping on the couch. After arresting Rico, the police awoke the 

defendant, who consented to a search of the apartment. The police found evidence of marijuana 

use throughout the apartment. In the living room, they found a plastic bag containing twelve 

plastic bags of marijuana stuffed into a couch and six individual packages of crack cocaine 

(2.434 grams) in a cigarette box under the couch. Rico had on his person two $20 bills, one $5 

bill, and nine $1 bills. Karon Jackson had two $50 bills and three $20 bills. The defendant 

denied knowing anything about the drugs. 

The investigating officer had told the defendant he would return to speak with her, and 

two days later he did. When the defendant opened the door, the officer immediately smelled 

marijuana. Inside the apartment, he found a marijuana cigarette and bag of marijuana, which the 

defendant admitted were hers. The officer arrested the defendant for possession of marijuana 

and advised her of her rights. She admitted being involved with the drugs found the previous 

Friday, July 19. She stated that she knew that Rico and Jackson were drug dealers and that she 

permitted them to use her apartment to sell drugs. She knew the drugs were in her apartment that 

Friday because Jackson had showed them to her the day before. 

The trial court noted, “you told the officer that I knew they were drug dealers, I knew 

they were dealing drugs, they showed me the drugs the night before.” The trial court concluded: 

“You’re making your home available and you know exactly what it is that they’re doing. You 

are encouraging and countenancing, at a minimum, what they are doing.” 

The trial court convicted the defendant as a principal in the second degree. 

A principal in the second degree, or an aider or abettor as he is 

sometimes termed, is one who is present, actually or 
 - 3 - 

constructively, assisting the perpetrator in the commission of the 

crime. In order to make a person a principal in the second degree 

actual participation in the commission of the crime is not 

necessary. The test is whether or not he was encouraging, inciting, 

or in some manner offering aid in the commission of the crime. If 

he was present lending countenance, or otherwise aiding while 

another did the act, he is an aider and abettor or principal in the 

second degree. 

Jones v. Commonwealth, 208 Va. 370, 372-73, 157 S.E.2d 907, 909 (1967). In this case, the 

defendant was present when Rico and Jackson sold drugs. Permitting them to use her apartment 

to distribute their drugs was an overt act in furtherance of their crimes. “‘When the alleged 

accomplice is actually present and performs overt acts of assistance or encouragement, he has 

communicated to the perpetrator his willingness to have the crime proceed and has demonstrated 

that he shares the criminal intent of the perpetrator.’” Rollston v. Commonwealth, 11 Va. App. 

535, 539, 399 S.E.2d 823, 825 (1991) (quoting Roger D. Groot, Criminal Offenses and Defenses 

in Virginia 183 (1984)). 

Police observed hand-to-hand transactions from the defendant’s apartment over a 

two-month period. The defendant knew Jackson and Rico were drug dealers and knew they dealt 

from her apartment. She admitted she let Jackson use her apartment for that purpose. The 

defendant knew the drugs were in her apartment because Jackson had shown them to her the 

night before. At trial the defendant denied making the statements that she let Jackson and Rico 

use her apartment to sell drugs, but the trial judge found her trial testimony “totally 

unconvincing” and accepted the officer’s testimony. 

The evidence presented permitted the trial court to conclude that the defendant acted as a 

principal in the second degree by aiding and abetting the sale of cocaine and marijuana from her 

apartment on July 19. Accordingly, we affirm the convictions. 

Affirmed.