COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Elder, Annunziata and Senior Judge Coleman∗

Argued at Richmond, Virginia 

RANDALL CHRISTOPHER VIA 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION∗∗ BY 

v. Record No. 2223-99-2 JUDGE SAM W. COLEMAN III 

 JANUARY 16, 2001 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY 

 Paul M. Peatross, Jr., Judge 

Norman Lamson for appellant. 

 Amy L. Marshall, Assistant Attorney General 

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

for appellee. 

 ∗

 Judge Coleman participated in the hearing and decision of 

this case prior to the effective date of his retirement on 

December 31, 2000 and thereafter by his designation as a senior 

judge pursuant to Code § 17.1-401. 

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

designated for publication.

 Randall Christopher Via was convicted in a bench trial of 

four counts of statutory burglary, three counts of grand 

larceny, and one count of arson. The sole issue on appeal is 

whether the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress 

his confession, which Via contends is the product of an unlawful 

search and seizure of his clothing. 
- 2 - 

 Via failed to timely file transcripts of the June 8, 2000 

suppression hearing or the June 22, 2000 bench trial. 

 Rule 5A:8 provides that "[t]he 

transcript of any proceeding is part of the 

record when it is filed in the office of the 

clerk of the trial court within 60 days 

after entry of the final judgment." We have 

established a firm policy concerning the 

filing of transcripts: "If . . . the 

transcript is indispensable to the 

determination of the case, then the 

requirements for making the transcript a 

part of the record on appeal must be 

strictly adhered to." 

Smith v. Commonwealth, 32 Va. App. 766, 771, 531 S.E.2d 11, 14 

(2000) (quoting Turner v. Commonwealth, 2 Va. App. 96, 99, 341 

S.E.2d 400, 402 (1986)). "[W]here the transcript is 

indispensable to the determination of an issue on appeal, the 

timely filing of a transcript is jurisdictional." Goodpasture 

v. Goodpasture, 7 Va. App. 55, 57, 371 S.E.2d 845, 846 (1988) 

(citation omitted). 

 We find that the transcripts of the suppression hearing and 

the bench trial are indispensable to appellate review. Although 

the trial judge set forth in his letter opinion the basis for 

his ruling, without a transcript of the suppression hearing or 

of the trial, we cannot ascertain whether the Commonwealth may 

have developed sufficient probable cause to support a belief 

that Via had committed the offenses that would have 

independently justified seizing and holding Via's clothing at 

the time he attempted to revoke his consent. Furthermore, 
- 3 - 

without a transcript of the proceedings, we cannot ascertain, 

among other things, the extent to which the Commonwealth's 

retention of Via's clothing may have affected his giving a 

confession in light of the considerable incriminating evidence 

with which he was confronted. Accordingly, we grant the 

Commonwealth's motion to dismiss the appeal. See Turner, 2 Va. 

App. at 99, 341 S.E.2d at 402 (stating that if the transcript is 

indispensable to appellate review and is not a part of the 

record, we must dismiss the appeal). 

 Further, we deny Via's motion for an extension of time to 

file the transcripts. Although Rule 5A:8 authorizes this Court 

to extend the date for filing a transcript for good cause shown, 

leave extending the filing date "must be granted before the 

deadline occurs, and not after." Jordan v. Price, 3 Va. App. 

672, 673, 353 S.E.2d 168, 168 (1987). "Orders extending the 

time for filing must be prospective and not retrospective." Id. 

Moreover, "[t]his Court has no authority to make exceptions to 

the filing requirements set out in the Rules." Turner, 2 Va. 

App. at 99, 341 S.E.2d at 402 (citation omitted). 

 We, therefore, dismiss the appeal. 

Dismissed.