Opinion ID: 1305815
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Refusal to Require Commonwealth to Elect One of the Two Capital Murder Charges Upon Which to Proceed

Text: Cardwell contends that the trial court erred in refusing to require the Commonwealth to elect to go forward on only one of the two charges of capital murder. He asserts, as he did at trial, that the two underlying offenses, i.e., robbery while armed with a deadly weapon and abduction to extort a pecuniary benefit, conflict and that the proof of the robbery would preclude the proof of the abduction. We do not agree. Ordinarily, whether the Commonwealth should be required to elect is a matter that rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, and its decision will not be reversed on appeal absent a showing that the rights of the accused may have been adversely affected. Bryant v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 310, 315, 53 S.E.2d 54, 56 (1949). Accordingly, the Commonwealth may proceed on alternative indictments or counts charging the commission of a single offense stated in different ways so as to meet the various phases of proof that might be offered. Id.; accord Buchanan v. Commonwealth, 238 Va. 389, 397, 384 S.E.2d 757, 762 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1063, 110 S.Ct. 880, 107 L.Ed.2d 963 (1990). In the present case, Cardwell does not claim that his rights were adversely affected, and we conclude that they were not. Additionally, as stated in Part IV, A of this opinion, the two counts are not factually inconsistent or conflicting. Consequently, the Commonwealth was not required to make an election.