Clabon Terrell Steward v. Commonwealth of Virginia ( 1999 )


Menu:
  •                   COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judges Elder and Lemons
    Argued at Chesapeake, Virginia
    CLABON TERRELL STEWARD
    MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
    v.   Record No. 2829-98-1                JUDGE DONALD W. LEMONS
    DECEMBER 21, 1999
    COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
    FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT NEWS
    Robert W. Curran, Judge
    (Theophlise L. Twitty; Jones and Twitty, on
    brief), for appellant. Appellant submitting
    on brief.
    Donald E. Jeffrey, III, Assistant Attorney
    General (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, on
    brief), for appellee.
    Clabon Terrell Steward appeals from his bench trial
    convictions for marital sexual battery and two misdemeanor
    charges of assault and battery.   On appeal, he contends that the
    evidence is insufficient to sustain the convictions.    Finding no
    error, we affirm appellant's convictions.
    The parties are familiar with the facts of the case and
    because this opinion has no precedental value it is not
    necessary to recite them.
    The only sufficiency argument Steward maintains on appeal
    is that in order to convict him under Code § 18.2-67.2:1, the
    * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code
    § 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.
    Commonwealth must prove that the parties were living "separate
    and apart."   However, the only sufficiency argument Steward made
    to the trial court was that the Commonwealth had not presented
    corroborative medical testimony and that the police officer did
    not describe any vaginal injury to the victim.    Accordingly,
    Steward is barred from raising this new issue for the first time
    on appeal.    See Rule 5A:18.   A challenge to the sufficiency of
    the Commonwealth's evidence is waived if not raised with some
    specificity in the trial court.     See Mounce v. Commonwealth, 
    4 Va. App. 433
    , 435, 
    357 S.E.2d 742
    , 744 (1987).    A reason not
    asserted at trial as to why the evidence is insufficient is not
    considered on appeal.    See Floyd v. Commonwealth, 
    219 Va. 575
    ,
    584, 
    249 S.E.2d 171
    , 176 (1978).    Moreover, the record does not
    reflect any reason to invoke the good cause or ends of justice
    exceptions to Rule 5A:18.
    On the issues that are preserved for appeal, upon familiar
    principles, we state the evidence in the light most favorable to
    the Commonwealth, granting to it all reasonable inferences
    fairly deducible therefrom.     See Martin v. Commonwealth, 
    4 Va. App. 438
    , 443, 
    358 S.E.2d 415
    , 418 (1987).    "The credibility of
    the witnesses and the weight accorded the evidence are matters
    solely for the fact finder who has the opportunity to see and
    hear that evidence as it is presented."     Sandoval v.
    Commonwealth, 
    20 Va. App. 133
    , 138, 
    455 S.E.2d 730
    , 732 (1995).
    The judgment of the trial court sitting without a jury is
    - 2 -
    entitled to the same weight as a jury verdict and will not be
    set aside unless it appears from the evidence that the judgment
    is plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.    See Martin,
    4 Va. App. at 443, 
    358 S.E.2d at 418
    .
    With respect to the charge of assault and battery on April
    18, 1998, Steward maintains that the incident was "mutual
    combat."    The evidence reveals that Steward "slammed" his wife
    into a wall, pushed her onto a bed, pinned her down and twice
    struck her in the face.   Her response of grabbing Steward's
    groin and striking him in response did not make the combat
    mutual.    For combat to be mutual, "it must have been voluntarily
    and mutually entered into by both or all parties to the affray."
    Lynn v. Commonwealth, 
    27 Va. App. 336
    , 356, 
    499 S.E.2d 1
    , 10-11
    (1998).
    With respect to the charge of assault and battery on May
    19, 1998, Steward claims that his wife used a knife to attack
    him and that he responded in self-defense.
    The trial judge resolved these factual disputes against
    Steward.    Upon review of the record, we cannot say that the
    trial court was plainly wrong or without evidence to support the
    decision.
    The convictions are affirmed.
    Affirmed.
    - 3 -