COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Coleman, Bray and Bumgardner 

Argued at Chesapeake, Virginia 

MONTUSA KARUNDO T. PACE 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 1984-99-1 JUDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER, III 

 MAY 9, 2000 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF HAMPTON 

Wilford Taylor, Jr., Judge 

 James S. Ellenson for appellant. 

 Leah A. Darron, Assistant Attorney General 

(Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, on brief), 

for appellee. 

 

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code 

§ 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.

 A jury convicted Montusa Karundo T. Pace of first-degree 

murder, burglary, three counts of robbery, and five counts of 

use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. He argues the 

trial court erred in admitting the statement of Adam Davis, a 

codefendant. The Commonwealth concedes the admission was error, 

but we conclude the error was harmless beyond a reasonable 

doubt. 

 On appeal, we consider the evidence and all reasonable 

inferences fairly deducible therefrom in the light most 

favorable to the Commonwealth. See Derr v. Commonwealth, 242 

Va. 413, 424, 410 S.E.2d 662, 668 (1991). Viewed in that 
manner, the evidence established that Adam Davis and Chris Moltz 

asked Frankie Davis if he knew anyone who might be interested in 

robbing a house for them. They believed drugs, weapons, and 

money were in the house. Frankie Davis contacted the defendant 

because the defendant had told him earlier that day that he 

wanted to commit a robbery. 

 The defendant went to Frankie Davis's house with two other 

men. All three were dressed in black, wore hoods over their 

heads, and covered their faces with masks. Frankie Davis and 

the defendant talked about the impending robbery. Adam Davis 

gave the defendant a floor plan of the house to be robbed, but 

when Adam Davis indicated that he wanted to go with the 

defendant, the defendant said, "all he had to do was point the 

house out and [the defendant and his friends] would take it from 

there." The three masked men got into their car and followed 

Adam Davis and Moltz. 

 A masked gunman forced his way inside James Kahley's house, 

pointed a gun to Kahley's head, and told him it was a robbery. 

Two more masked gunmen entered the house. As the defendant 

entered, he shot Kahley's dog, and ordered Kahley and two 

friends to lie on the floor. When a gunshot rang out upstairs, 

the defendant told Kahley "not to fucking look up again or he'll 

start killing people." The defendant had a chrome gun with a 

laser sight. 

- 2 -
Another masked gunman, later identified as Otis Thomas or 

"O," went to the second floor. There he shot Michael Jackson 

and got into a scuffle with Aaron Melton. The fight broke up 

when the third masked gunman came to help Thomas. The two 

gunmen hurried downstairs, and thirty seconds later, all three 

gunmen left the house. 

The defendant went to Frankie Davis's house the next 

morning. He told Frankie Davis that the house was not like Adam 

Davis and Moltz had described it. He also told Frankie Davis 

that he forced some guy inside and shot a Rottweiler when it 

came at him. The defendant stated, "O [Otis Thomas] had to wet 

somebody." Frankie Davis understood that to mean that Thomas 

had shot somebody. The defendant gave Frankie Davis a plastic 

bag to keep because "he didn't want it to be in his house." The 

bag contained a box of laser beams, a mechanism that fits around 

the trigger of a gun, and a box for a laser sight. Frankie 

Davis buried the items in his mother's backyard. 

During the trial, the Commonwealth presented the statement 

that Adam Davis gave the police as a declaration against penal 

interest. In the statement Adam Davis described the planning of 

the robbery. He denied knowing the robbers and did not identify 

any of them. He gave no information about the events at the 

Kahley house. The statement minimized Adam Davis's role in 

planning the robbery, and it paralleled much of the testimony of 

Frankie Davis about that stage of the robbery. 

- 3 -
 The Commonwealth conceded the trial court erred in 

admitting Adam Davis's statement. Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 

116, 134, 119 S. Ct. 1887, 1899 (1999), which was decided after 

the trial of this case, held that the admission of an 

accomplice's confession is a violation of a defendant's right to 

confrontation. However, "'an otherwise valid conviction should 

not be set aside if the reviewing court may confidently say, on 

the whole record, that the constitutional error was harmless 

beyond a reasonable doubt.'" Dearing v. Commonwealth, 259 Va. 

117, 123, 524 S.E.2d 121, 125 (2000) (quoting Delaware v. Van 

Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 681 (1986)). 

In order to determine if the error is harmless, this "court 

must be able to declare a belief that it was harmless beyond a 

reasonable doubt." Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 

(1967). 

This standard requires a determination of 

"whether there is a reasonable possibility 

that the evidence complained of might have 

contributed to the conviction." In making 

that determination, the reviewing court is 

to consider a host of factors, including the 

importance of the tainted evidence in the 

prosecution's case, whether that evidence 

was cumulative, the presence or absence of 

evidence corroborating or contradicting the 

tainted evidence on material points, and the 

overall strength of the prosecution's case. 

Lilly v. Commonwealth, 258 Va. 548, 551, 523 S.E.2d 208, 209 

(1999) (citations omitted). 

- 4 -
Applying these principles, we conclude that the error was 

harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Frankie Davis testified 

that the defendant had said he wanted to rob someone and that 

Frankie Davis contacted the defendant when a robbery opportunity 

presented itself. The defendant and two other men went to 

Frankie Davis's house dressed in black with ski masks and hoods 

to conceal their identity. The defendant spoke to Adam Davis 

and was given a floor plan of the house to be robbed. The 

defendant told Adam Davis to point out the house and he and his 

boys would do the rest. Frankie Davis also testified that the 

defendant came to his house early the next morning and told him 

the house they robbed was different than described. The 

defendant told Frankie Davis that he forced a guy into the house 

and shot a dog. The defendant said that Thomas shot someone. 

The defendant gave Frankie Davis a bag that contained a laser 

switch because he did not want it to be found in his house. 

Kahley testified that he was forced back in his house at 

gunpoint and that a masked man with a laser beam on his gun shot 

the dog. That man guarded him and his friends as the other two 

went upstairs. When he heard a shot upstairs, the defendant 

told him "not to fucking look up again or he'll start killing 

people." One of the witnesses, Charles Oakman, testified that 

he and Jackson were robbed before Jackson was killed. A second 

witness, Aaron Melton, testified that he also was robbed. 

- 5 -
The statement made by Adam Davis never mentioned the 

defendant or his role in the robbery. It only described the 

planning of the robbery and added no information to that 

presented by Frankie Davis. The statement was primarily an 

attempt by Adam Davis to minimize his role in planning the 

robbery. The statement did not implicate the defendant in any 

way, but the other evidence of the Commonwealth was credible and 

overwhelmingly implicated the defendant in the crimes for which 

he was convicted. The admission of Adam Davis's statement was 

harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, we affirm the 

judgment of the trial court. 

 Affirmed.

- 6 -