COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Elder and Agee 

Argued at Salem, Virginia 

SHARIFF AL'MALIK 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 1170-01-3 CHIEF JUDGE JOHANNA L. FITZPATRICK 

 APRIL 2, 2002 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BOTETOURT COUNTY 

George E. Honts, III, Judge 

 Charles R. Allen, Jr., for appellant. 

 Linwood T. Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney 

General (Jerry W. Kilgore, Attorney General, 

on brief), for appellee. 

 Shariff Al'Malik (appellant) was convicted of perjury, in 

violation of Code § 18.2-434.1 The sole issue raised is whether 

the evidence was sufficient to establish that the alleged offense 

occurred in Botetourt County, Virginia. Finding no error, we 

affirm. 

I. BACKGROUND 

 Under familiar principles of appellate review, we examine 

the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, 

 

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not 

designated for publication.

1

 Code § 18.2-434 provides in pertinent part: "If any 

person to whom an oath is lawfully administered on any occasion 

willfully swear falsely on such occasion . . . he shall be 

guilty of perjury, punishable as a Class 5 felony." 
the prevailing party below, granting to that evidence all 

reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom. See Juares v. 

Commonwealth, 26 Va. App. 154, 156, 493 S.E.2d 677, 678 (1997).

 So viewed, Officer T.S. Boone of the Botetourt County 

Sheriff's Department arrested appellant for misdemeanor charges of 

speeding, reckless driving and attempting to elude a police 

officer. At the scene of the arrest, appellant identified himself 

as Levi Johnson. Boone was unable to obtain any information about 

appellant from DMV at that time. Boone then brought appellant 

before a magistrate at the Botetourt County magistrate's office. 

Before giving appellant the oath, the magistrate asked Boone to 

unlock appellant's handcuffs so he could raise his right hand and 

be sworn. The magistrate then asked appellant to identify 

himself, and appellant again stated he was Levi Johnson. While 

appellant was in jail, Officer Willie Wilson of the Botetourt 

County Sheriff's Department recognized him from prior encounters. 

Wilson did not know appellant's first name, but he knew it was not 

Levi. Wilson requested and received information from the Roanoke 

City jail which confirmed appellant's name to be Sam Johnson and 

that he went by a Muslim name, Shariff Al'Malik. Wilson took the 

information to Boone, and Boone confronted appellant. Appellant 

admitted he was Sam Johnson and that his Muslim name was Shariff 

Al'Malik. He also stated that Levi Johnson was his brother. 

 Appellant moved to strike the evidence as insufficient at the 

end of the Commonwealth's case, but did not argue that the 

Commonwealth failed to establish venue. 

II. ANALYSIS 

- 2 -
 Appellant contends that the alleged failure to prove the 

offense occurred in Botetourt County is a question of subject 

matter jurisdiction which can be raised at any time and, thus, 

this issue is not barred by Rule 5A:18. Assuming without deciding 

that appellant adequately preserved his sufficiency argument that 

the evidence failed to establish that the perjury occurred in 

Botetourt County, it is without merit. Properly viewed, the 

evidence proved that when Boone brought appellant to the 

magistrate's office in Botetourt County on August 5, 2000, 

appellant was sworn and identified himself as Levi Johnson before 

both the magistrate and Boone. Wilson processed appellant in the 

Botetourt County jail on these charges and testified that he knew 

that Levi Johnson was not appellant's correct name. After further 

questioning by Boone, appellant admitted he had lied about his 

name and he was, in fact, Sam Johnson and that he used the Muslim 

name Shariff Al'Malik. The evidence clearly established that the 

entire chain of events underlying appellant's perjury charge 

- 3 -
occurred in Botetourt County. Thus, the evidence was sufficient 

to establish venue2 as properly laid therein. 

 Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. 

 Affirmed. 

 2

 Code § 19.2-244 provides in pertinent part: "Except as 

otherwise provided by law, the prosecution of a criminal case 

shall be had in the county or city in which the offense was 

committed." 

- 4 -