Catlett v. Commonwealth

Full title: IRVIN HANNIS CATLETT, JR. v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

Court: Court of Appeals of Virginia. Alexandria

Date published: Apr 20, 1993

Record No. 0209-91-4 (Va. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 1993)

Opinion

Record No. 0209-91-4

April 20, 1993

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY PAUL F. SHERIDAN, JUDGE.

Irvin Hannis Catlett, Jr., pro se.

(Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General; Katherine B. Toone, Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. Appellee submitting on brief.

Present: Chief Judge Koontz, Judges Barrow and Moon.

Argued at Alexandria, Virginia.

MEMORANDUM OPINION^_

_ Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not designated for publication.

CHIEF JUDGE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR.

In a jury trial, Irvin Hannis Catlett, Jr. (Catlett) was convicted on twelve counts of forgery and was sentenced to forty-eight months in jail and a $12,000 fine. On appeal, Catlett contends that the Commonwealth's failure to disclose a criminal conviction of a Commonwealth's witness violated his right to due process. For the reasons that follow, we affirm Catlett's convictions for forgery.

The Commonwealth contends that we may not reach the merits of this issue because Catlett failed to file the trial transcripts in a timely manner as required by Rule 5A:8. "If the record on appeal is sufficient in the absence of the transcript to determine the merits of [Catlett's] allegations, we are free to proceed to hear the case." Turner v. Commonwealth, 2 Va. App. 96, 99, 341 S.E.2d 400, 402 (1986). However, if "the transcript is indispensable to the determination of the case," the appeal determination of the case," the appeal must be dismissed without reaching the merits of Catlett's claim. Id.

Based upon a review of the record before us, we find that the witness in question, Paul Pantages or Paul Pandajis, was arrested and charged with making a home improvement without a license and non-performance of a home improvement in Maryland on October 10, 1990. However, Catlett's trial took place in July 1990, several months before Pantages was arrested and charged. Thus, the Commonwealth did not fail to disclose exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87-88 (1963), because that evidence did not exist at the time of trial. Accordingly, Catlett's convictions are affirmed.

Affirmed.