Opinion ID: 1059828
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: assignment of error procedurally defaulted

Text: Swisher argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to declare the Virginia capital murder and death penalty statutes unconstitutional and to prohibit the imposition of the death penalty. Swisher claims that Virginia's death penalty statutes, specifically... Code §§ 19.2-2[6]4.2 through 19.2-264.5, [and former Code §§ 17-110.1 and 17-110.2] ... on their face and as applied, violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a fair trial, and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. In support of his contentions, Swisher merely refers this Court to a memorandum of law that he filed in the trial court. We hold that Swisher's assertions are insufficient and constitute a procedural default. An appellant who asserts that a trial court's ruling was erroneous has an obligation to state clearly to the appellate court the grounds for that assertion. A cross-reference to arguments made at trial is insufficient. Spencer v. Commonwealth, 240 Va. 78, 99, 393 S.E.2d 609, 622, cert. denied, 498 U.S. 908, 111 S.Ct. 281, 112 L.Ed.2d 235 (1990); Jenkins v. Commonwealth, 244 Va. 445, 460-61, 423 S.E.2d 360, 370 (1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 1036, 113 S.Ct. 1862, 123 L.Ed.2d 483 (1993).