Barry Edwards English v. Commonwealth ( 1997 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Elder, Bray and Fitzpatrick
Argued at Salem, Virginia
BARRY EDWARDS ENGLISH
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 0947-96-3 JUDGE RICHARD S. BRAY
APRIL 29, 1997
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY
William N. Alexander, II, Judge
W. Clarke Whitfield, Jr. (Turner, Haskins &
Whitfield, PLC, on brief), for appellant.
Monica S. McElyea, Assistant Attorney General
(James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General, on
brief), for appellee.
Barry Edwards English (defendant) was convicted in a bench
trial of three counts of aggravated sexual battery in violation
of Code § 18.2-67.3 and one count of forcible sodomy in violation
of Code § 18.2-67.1. On appeal, he complains that the evidence
was insufficient to support the convictions. We disagree and
affirm the trial court.
The parties are fully conversant with the record, and this
memorandum opinion recites only those facts necessary to a
disposition of the appeal.
Under familiar principles of appellate review, we examine
the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth,
granting to it all reasonable inferences fairly deducible
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
therefrom. See Martin v. Commonwealth, 4 Va. App. 438, 443, 358
S.E.2d 415, 418 (1987). The judgment of a trial court, sitting
without a jury, is entitled to the same weight as a jury verdict
and will be disturbed only if plainly wrong or without evidence
to support it. See id. The credibility of a witness, the weight
accorded the testimony, and the inferences to be drawn from
proven facts are matters solely for the fact finder's
determination. See Long v. Commonwealth, 8 Va. App. 194, 199,
379 S.E.2d 473, 476 (1989). An appellate court "should not . . .
substitute its own judgment [on these issues], even if its
opinion might differ from [the fact finder's]." George v.
Commonwealth, 242 Va. 264, 278, 411 S.E.2d 12, 20 (1991) (quoting
Snyder v. Commonwealth, 202 Va. 1009, 1016, 121 S.E.2d 452, 457
(1961)), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 973 (1992).
Here, the offenses occurred in the fall of 1989 and were not
reported until 1995. However, the victim was only nine or ten
years of age when assaulted, and defendant, with a history of
violence, threatened to harm both her and her family if she
reported the abuse. Following the crimes, defendant was
imprisoned on unrelated convictions, and the victim spoke only
after learning of his imminent release. The significance, if
any, attributable to such delay is a matter for consideration by
the fact finder, and the mere "failure to immediately report the
incident [does] not render [a victim's] testimony inherently
incredible as a matter of law." See Corvin v. Commonwealth, 13
- 2 -
Va. App. 296, 299, 411 S.E.2d 235, 237 (1991). Under the instant
circumstances, the court correctly concluded that the victim's
conduct was reasonable and did not discredit her testimony.
Moreover, other evidence provided ample support for the
convictions. Defendant had resided in the home with the victim
and her mother between early September and late November, 1989,
and was regularly alone with the child. The victim recounted the
offending events in detail, and her testimony was alone
sufficient to establish defendant's guilt. See, e.g., id.
Accordingly, we affirm the convictions.
Affirmed.
- 3 -