Opinion ID: 1308443
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Suppression of Property Seized in Indiana.

Text: Bunch contends that the trial court should have suppressed a string of pearls, allegedly belonging to Thomas, that was seized during a search of his mother's home in Indiana. Bunch states on brief that an Indiana search warrant, pursuant to which the search of his mother's home was conducted, listed only a .22 caliber weapon and ... two rings (diamond and pearl). Because the string of pearls was not identified in the warrant, Bunch maintains, it was not properly seized and should have been suppressed. The Indiana search warrant is not in the record, and we cannot determine otherwise what items were listed in the warrant. Further, we cannot find where any question was raised in the trial court concerning the sufficiency of the warrant with respect to the sting of pearls. As with all nonjurisdictional issues, a search and seizure question cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. Rule 5:21; Girardi v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 459, 465-66, 270 S.E.2d 743, 747 (1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 913, 101 S.Ct. 1986, 68 L.Ed.2d 303 (1981).