Samuel Ralph Robinson v. Commonwealth ( 2003 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bumgardner, Humphreys and Clements
Argued at Salem, Virginia
SAMUEL RALPH ROBINSON
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 0563-02-3 JUDGE JEAN HARRISON CLEMENTS
MAY 13, 2003
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE
Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge
Amanda E. Shaw (Office of the Public
Defender, on brief), for appellant.
Jennifer R. Franklin, Assistant Attorney
General (Jerry W. Kilgore, Attorney General,
on brief), for appellee.
Samuel Ralph Robinson was convicted in a bench trial of
possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony,
in violation of Code § 18.2-308.2. On appeal, Robinson contends
the trial court erred in finding that Code § 18.2-308.2(A)
prohibited him from possessing a firearm in his own backyard.
Finding no error, we affirm Robinson's conviction.
As the parties are fully conversant with the record in this
case and because this memorandum opinion carries no precedential
value, this opinion recites only those facts and incidents of the
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
proceedings as are necessary to the parties' understanding of the
disposition of this appeal.
The facts essential to this appeal are not in dispute. On
July 11, 2001, Robinson, a previously convicted felon, possessed
and fired a revolver while standing in the backyard of his
residence in the City of Roanoke. Robinson's probation officer
testified that he told Robinson in 1993, after Robinson was
convicted of rape, that possessing a firearm thereafter would be a
crime.
On appeal, Robinson contends the version of Code
§ 18.2-308.2(A) in effect on July 11, 2001, 1 did not prohibit him
from possessing a firearm in the curtilage of his residence. 2 The
exception set forth in the 2001 amendment to the statute,
permitting possession in the residence and curtilage of the
residence, applied, he argues, to all firearms, not just stun
weapons and tasers. We disagree.
1
The version of Code § 18.2-308.2(A) in effect at the time
of the subject offense provided, in pertinent part, as follows:
It shall be unlawful for (i) any person who
has been convicted of a felony . . . to
knowingly and intentionally possess or
transport any (a) firearm or (b) stun weapon
or taser as defined in § 18.2-308.1 except in
such person's residence or the curtilage
thereof . . . .
2
The Commonwealth does not dispute that Robinson's backyard
was a part of the curtilage of his residence.
- 2 -
We addressed the same issue in Alger v. Commonwealth, 40
Va. App. 89, 578 S.E.2d 51 (2003). In that case, Alger argued
that possessing a shotgun in her own home on September 7, 2001,
was not prohibited conduct under the version of Code
§ 18.2-308.2(A) in effect at that time. Like Robinson, Alger
contended "that the exception for possession inside the home or
curtilage in the 2001 amendment applied to all firearms not just
those enumerated in clause (b), stun weapons or tasers." Id. at
92, 578 S.E.2d at 52-53. Finding that such an interpretation
"would yield an absurd result," we rejected Alger's construction
of the statute and concluded that "the exception appl[ied] only to
stun weapons and tasers." Id. at 94, 578 S.E.2d at 54. We held,
therefore, "that the 2001 amendments did not permit convicted
felons to possess firearms . . . in their residence or the
curtilage thereof." Id. at 94-95, 578 S.E.2d at 54.
The same reasoning and conclusions are equally applicable
here. Thus, for the reasons more particularly stated in Alger, we
hold the trial court did not err in finding that Code
§ 18.2-308.2(A) prohibited Robinson from possessing a firearm in
his own backyard. 3
3
Robinson also argues that his due process rights were
violated because he was entitled to rely on the Code of Virginia
as published when it varied from the Acts of Assembly. However,
having rejected the interpretation of Code § 18.2-308.2(A) upon
which Robinson's argument is based, we need not address the issue
further.
- 3 -
Accordingly, we affirm Robinson's conviction.
Affirmed.
- 4 -