Source: https://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=.%201366-17-3%20&s=VA&d=125513
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:50:41+00:00

Document:
his house. Appellant was forty-eight years old.
have a driver’s license or a learner’s permit.
store because she thought appellant might have a weapon.
criminal offenses, and trial was ultimately set for July 21, 2015.
child. The Commonwealth also filed a copy of an indictment charging appellant with the offense.
unlawfully, willfully, and feloniously did take and attempt to take immoral, improper, and indecent liberties with the child . . . for the purpose of arousing and gratifying sexual desire and did commit and attempt to commit a lewd and lascivious act upon the body of the child . . . . At the time of this offense, the child . . . was under the age of 16 years and the defendant . . . was over 16 years of age and at least five years older than the child.
Additionally, the Commonwealth attached a copy of the police report detailing the facts of the case.
friend’s seven-year-old daughter, when he drove her to school.
[o]bviously the General Assembly has made a special provision for this and obviously one of the charges that [appellant] has today is the same charge for which the Commonwealth is attempting to introduce so I think that kind of goes more to the weight of introduction.
sound discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.’” Michels v.
Commonwealth, 47 Va. App. 461, 465 (2006) (quoting Breeden v. Commonwealth, 43 Va. App.
has occurred.” Tynes v. Commonwealth, 49 Va. App. 17, 21 (2006) (quoting Thomas v.
Commonwealth, 44 Va. App. 741, 753, adopted upon reh’g en banc, 45 Va. App. 811 (2005)).
However, we review issues of statutory construction de novo. Kozmina v. Commonwealth, 281 Va.
A. In a criminal case in which the defendant is accused of a felony sexual offense involving a child victim, evidence of the defendant’s conviction of another sexual offense or offenses is admissible and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.
1 Although the court initially admitted the prior conviction, it subsequently instructed the jury that it was not proof of guilt. For purposes of this appeal, we assume without deciding that the resulting confusion might have led the jury to consider the prior conviction as evidence of guilt. Accordingly, we address the initial ruling on the admission of the prior conviction.
B. The Commonwealth shall provide to the defendant 14 days prior to trial notice of its intention to introduce copies of final orders evidencing the defendant’s qualifying prior criminal convictions. Such notice shall include (i) the date of each prior conviction, (ii) the name and jurisdiction of the court where each prior conviction was obtained, and (iii) each offense of which the defendant was convicted. Prior to commencement of the trial, the Commonwealth shall provide to the defendant photocopies of certified copies of the final orders that it intends to introduce.
C. This section shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other section or rule of court.
D. For purposes of this section, “sexual offense” means any offense or any attempt or conspiracy to engage in any offense described in Article 7 (§ 18.2-61 et seq.) of Chapter 4 or § 18.2-370, 18.2-370.01, or 18.2-370.1 or any substantially similar offense under the laws of another state or territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, or the United States.
E. Evidence offered in a criminal case pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be subject to exclusion in accordance with the Virginia Rules of Evidence, including but not limited to Rule 2:403.
Code § 18.2-67.7:1 verbatim. Rule 2:413.
crime charged in the indictment.” Gonzales v. Commonwealth, 45 Va. App. 375, 380 (2005).
if legitimate probative value of such proof outweighs its incidental prejudice, such evidence is admissible if it tends to prove any relevant fact pertaining to the offense charged, such as where it is relevant to show motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, accident, or if they are part of a common scheme or plan.
issue is one of first impression, this Court may seek guidance from the Federal Rules of Evidence.
rules the Court considered all have similar counterparts in Virginia law”).
conviction order is admissible into evidence under Code § 18.2-67.7:1 and Rule 2:413.
purpose of establishing propensity to commit other sexual offenses.” Kelly, 510 F.3d at 437.
General Assembly intended that the legislation declare or explain existing law.” Chappell v.
to testify by two-way closed-circuit television in certain circumstances).
probative value against any undue prejudice when determining the admissibility of any evidence.
adequately conduct the balancing test required by Rule 2:403.
balancing test to assess the probative value against any undue prejudicial effect. See Spencer v.
only the North Carolina conviction order, but also the indictment to which appellant pled guilty.
the prior conviction before making its ruling to allow admission of the conviction order.
62 (2007) (quoting Crest v. Commonwealth, 40 Va. App. 165, 172 n.3 (2003)).
this case and that this probative value outweighed the risk of any unfair prejudice.
its reasoning before the trial began.
its discretion in admitting the evidence, and we affirm appellant’s convictions.

References: v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 § 18
 § 18
 v. 
 § 18
 v.

 v.

 v.