Court Opinion

ID: 9852927
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:39:18.493405+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:37.688799
License: Public Domain

Elder, J.,
dissenting.
1 respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusion as to the sufficiency of the evidence in this case. The Virginia Beach City Code section at issue, § 23-14, tracks the language of Virginia Code § 18.2-415. The City Code proscribes only “conduct having a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person ... at whom, individually, such conduct is directed.” In addition, it expressly states that “the conduct prohibited under [this section] shall not be deemed to include the utterance or display of any words.” After excluding appellant’s loud statements as required by the statute, the remaining evidence simply does not support the conclusion that appellant’s behavior had a direct tendency to incite Officer Fawley to violence.
Officer Fawley testified that, while he was attempting to write appellant a summons, she jumped out of his police car and screamed at him. Fie also testified that she verbally resisted his efforts to issue her a traffic summons by continuing to scream, even after he warned her that he would arrest her for disorderly conduct if she did not calm down. When she refused to comply, Fawley placed her under arrest. Officer Dunn then arrived on the scene and held appellant’s arms “lightly [behind] her back.” He testified that “there was no need for any force because she wasn’t offering any kind of resistance . . .[, although] she was still screaming as loud as she could ... .” Although Officer Fawley testified that he ‘ ‘felt as though [he] was going to have to fight” to subdue appellant, he admitted that “[s]he didn’t fight.” He also testified that he personally was “very calm the whole time.” Both officers testified that appellant never threatened to use force against them and never offered any physical resistance other than getting out of Fawley’s car with the stated purpose of getting her baby out of the house. In addition, appellant did not attempt to flee the scene and did not resist when Officer Dunn held her arms lightly behind her back. Even viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the evidence in this case is insufficient to show that appellant’s behavior, excluding her words as we must under the statute, had a direct tendency to cause violence. I would reverse and dismiss.