Rashawn A. Neville v. Commonwealth of Virginia ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                      COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present: Judges Willis, Elder and Senior Judge Cole
    Argued at Richmond, Virginia
    RASHAWN A. NEVILLE
    MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
    v.   Record No. 1228-99-2               JUDGE JERE M. H. WILLIS, JR.
    JULY 5, 2000
    COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
    FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HENRICO COUNTY
    Buford M. Parsons, Jr., Judge
    Matthew P. Geary (Goodwin, Sutton, DuVal &
    Geary, P.L.C., on brief), for appellant.
    Donald E. Jeffrey, III, Assistant Attorney
    General (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, on
    brief), for appellee.
    On appeal from his conviction of grand larceny, in
    violation of Code § 18.2-95, Rashawn A. Neville contends that
    the evidence failed to support his conviction.      We affirm.
    On appeal, we review the evidence in
    the light most favorable to the
    Commonwealth, granting to it all reasonable
    inferences fairly deducible therefrom. The
    judgment of a trial court sitting without a
    jury is 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.
    Martin v. Commonwealth, 
    4 Va. App. 438
    , 443, 
    358 S.E.2d 415
    , 418
    (1987).
    * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code
    § 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.
    In a bench trial, Neville was convicted of breaking and
    entering, in violation of Code § 18.2-91, and grand larceny, in
    violation of Code § 18.2-95.   The trial court sentenced him to
    three years imprisonment for each offense.     Neville's petition
    for appeal relating to the breaking and entering conviction was
    denied.
    Neville's convictions arise from an incident that occurred
    on May 6, 1998, at the home of Norris Edward Temple, Jr.     Temple
    testified that, arriving home that afternoon, he saw that an air
    conditioning unit had been removed from a window.     When he
    entered the house, "[e]verything was turned over, the tables,
    and the couch was moved."   In the kitchen, he saw Neville, who
    attempted to hide his face and ran out of the house.     When
    questioned by police, Neville admitted stealing a necklace from
    the house.
    Neville contends that the evidence was insufficient to
    prove that the value of the necklace was $200 or more.      See Code
    § 18.2-95.   No evidence was offered to prove the condition of
    the necklace, its carat weight, or its current value.     However,
    Temple testified that the necklace was worth $600 and that he
    had bought it at the Gold Factory in the Sixth Street
    Marketplace for $600.
    Although the value of stolen property is measured as of the
    time of the theft, the original purchase price may be considered
    as evidence of its current value.      See Dunn v. Commonwealth, 222
    - 2 -
    Va. 704, 705, 
    284 S.E.2d 792
    , 792 (1981).   "[T]he opinion
    testimony of the owner of personal property is competent and
    admissible on the question of the value of such property,
    regardless of the owner's knowledge of property values."     Walls
    v. Commonwealth, 
    248 Va. 480
    , 482, 
    450 S.E.2d 363
    , 364 (1994).
    The valuation of jewelry is distinguishable from that of
    depreciable personal property.    Jewelry tends to hold its value,
    and often to appreciate.   No evidence disclosed that the
    necklace had suffered misuse or deterioration.    See Lester v.
    Commonwealth, 
    30 Va. App. 495
    , 505, 
    518 S.E.2d 318
    , 322 (1999).
    Without any such countervailing evidence, the fact finder was
    entitled to infer from the evidence that the necklace,
    originally purchased for $600, was worth at least $200 at the
    time of the theft.   Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court
    is affirmed.
    The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
    Affirmed.
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1228992

Filed Date: 7/5/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014