Opinion ID: 1059740
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Toxicologist Evidence

Text: Walker assigns error to the trial court's refusal to admit into evidence the testimony and reports of a toxicologist who found the presence of drugs in the systems of both victims. Walker asserts that this evidence was relevant because it would be circumstantial evidence ... of a possible alternative motive for the killing by someone else. We disagree. Only evidence which bears upon and is pertinent to matters in issue is relevant and should be admitted. Coe, 231 Va. at 87, 340 S.E.2d at 823. Evidence of collateral facts and facts incapable of supporting an inference on the issue are irrelevant and cannot be accepted into evidence. Id. There is nothing in this record which supports Walker's theory that the murders were drug-related, and evidence of the presence of drugs in the victims' systems simply does not support the inference that someone other than Walker committed the crimes. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit this evidence.