Kabonji Rahsaan Roane v. Commonwealth of Virginia

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Willis, Elder and Bray
Argued at Richmond, Virginia
KABONJI RAHSAAN ROANE
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 2988-99-2 JUDGE JERE M. H. WILLIS, JR.
MAY 8, 2001
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HANOVER COUNTY
John R. Alderman, Judge
(Patrick R. Bynum, Jr., on brief), for
appellant. Appellant submitting on brief.
(Mark L. Earley, Attorney General; Richard B.
Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, on
brief), for appellee.
On appeal from his convictions of robbery, in violation of
Code § 18.2-58, and use of a firearm in the commission of a
felony, in violation of Code § 18.2-53.1, Kabonji Rahsaan Roane
contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence, at
the sentencing phase of his trial, an exhibit displaying his prior
convictions. Because Roane has failed to provide a record
sufficient to allow us to determine the merits of his appeal, we
dismiss the appeal.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
I. BACKGROUND
During the sentencing phase of Roane's bifurcated trial, the
Commonwealth submitted Exhibit 6, which contained a record of his
prior convictions. Roane admitted that he had received timely
notice of the Commonwealth's intent to introduce evidence of his
prior convictions as required by Code § 19.2-295.1. However, he
objected to the introduction of the exhibit on the grounds that
(1) it did not include the date of each conviction, (2) it did not
contain the name and jurisdiction of the court where each prior
conviction was had, (3) it did not distinguish between felony and
misdemeanor convictions, (4) it did not establish that the prior
convictions were similar to any Virginia statutes, and (5) it was
not properly authenticated. The trial court overruled Roane's
objections and admitted Commonwealth's Exhibit 6 as evidence of
his prior convictions.
II. ADMISSIBILITY OF COMMONWEALTH'S EXHIBIT 6
On appeal,
the judgment of the lower court is presumed
to be correct and the burden is on the
appellant to present to us a sufficient
record from which we can determine whether
the lower court has erred in the respect
complained of. If the appellant fails to do
this, the judgment will be affirmed.
Justis v. Young, 202 Va. 631, 632, 119 S.E.2d 255, 256-57 (1961)
(citations omitted). Furthermore, we "must dispose of the case
upon the record and cannot base [our] decision upon appellant's
petition or brief, or statements of counsel in open court. We
- 2 -
may act only upon facts contained in the record." Smith v.
Commonwealth, 16 Va. App. 630, 635, 432 S.E.2d 2, 6 (1993)
(citation omitted).
Although Commonwealth's Exhibit 6 was before the trial
court, it is not contained in the record before us and the
record contains no acceptable substitute. Commonwealth's
Exhibit 6 is indispensable to a determination of the issues
raised by Roane. Without it, we cannot review the trial court's
ruling. Therefore, Roane has failed to present a record
sufficient for appeal.
For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed.
- 3 -