COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Moon, Judges Coleman and Overton 

Argued at Salem, Virginia 

MELVIN RAY GILL 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 0334-96-3 CHIEF JUDGE NORMAN K. MOON 

 FEBRUARY 25, 1997 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF FRANKLIN COUNTY 

B. A. Davis, III, Judge 

 Mary E. Harkins for appellant. 

 (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General; 

Kimberley A. Whittle, Assistant Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 Melvin Ray Gill appeals his conviction for attempted 

malicious wounding of a law enforcement officer in violation of 

Code § 18.2-51.1. Gill argues the evidence was insufficient to 

prove he had the intent to maliciously wound a law enforcement 

officer. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. 

 On August 6, 1995, Officer F. W. Hodges of the Rocky Mount 

Police Department observed a large crowd of people congregating 

on a street. Suspecting criminal activity, Hodges followed the 

group as it moved toward a nearby car wash. Hodges concealed 

himself in woods near the car wash and watched as a second group 

of people approached, and a dispute began between the two groups. 

 Hodges heard bottles being broken and gunshots, at which point 

he ran into the crowd, identifying himself as a police officer. 

 

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

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

Hodges was dressed in a "raid shirt," which had the letters 

"POLICE" emblazoned on it in large letters. 

 Upon Hodges' arrival, the crowd scattered, and Hodges 

observed an individual holding his hand under his shirt as he 

ran. Believing that the person might have been responsible for 

the gunshots, Hodges pursued him. As he did so he noticed Gill 

running to his left. Hodges observed Gill turn and throw a 

cinder block at Hodges, missing him by three feet. Hodges had a 

clear view of Gill's face and made eye contact with him before he 

hurled the cinder block. 

 Gill fled into a nearby house with three other people. 

Additional police arrived, and Gill was arrested as he exited the 

house. Gill apologized to Hodges for throwing the cinder block 

and stated that he had not been aiming at Hodges. 

 At trial, Gill denied ever having held or thrown a cinder 

block. His counsel moved to strike the evidence as being 

insufficient to prove that Gill had thrown a cinder block at 

Hodges and insufficient to prove that Gill would have been aware 

that Hodges was a police officer or that Hodges was engaged in 

the performance of his official duties. 

 On appeal, Gill does not argue these original objections, 

but instead, for the first time, raises the argument that the 

evidence was insufficient to prove he had the intent to 

maliciously wound a law enforcement officer. Rule 5A:18 provides 

that "[n]o ruling of the trial court . . . will be considered as 

a basis for reversal unless the objection was stated together 
- 3 - 

with the grounds therefor at the time of the ruling . . . ." 

McQuinn v. Commonwealth, 20 Va. App. 753, 755, 460 S.E.2d 624, 

626 (1995) (en banc). Rule 5A:18 bars Gill from raising a new 

argument on appeal except for good cause shown or to meet the 

ends of justice. 

 The record establishes that when Hodges intervened during 

the altercation, Hodges was wearing a "raid shirt" which was 

emblazoned with large "POLICE" letters. Hodges also testified 

that when he entered the foray, he announced that he was a police 

officer. The record also contains evidence that Hodges had a 

clear view of Gill's face and made eye contact with him prior to 

Gill throwing the cinder block, which came within three feet of 

striking Hodges. The record also indicates that Gill apologized 

to Hodges for throwing the cinder block. 

 Because the record does not show any obvious miscarriage of 

justice, neither the ends of justice nor good cause permit waiver 

of the Rule 5A:18 bar. Commonwealth v. Mounce, 4 Va. App. 433, 

436, 357 S.E.2d 742, 744 (1987). Accordingly, we do not reach 

the only issue raised by Gill on brief and accordingly affirm. 

 Affirmed.