From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ross v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia. Richmond
Dec 23, 1997
Record No. 0068-97-2 (Va. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 1997)

Opinion

Record No. 0068-97-2

December 23, 1997

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Buckingham County, Timothy J. Hauler, Judge.

Robert H. Gray, Jr., for appellant.

Marla Graff Decker, Assistant Attorney General (Richard Cullen, Attorney General; John K. Byrum, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Present: Judges Benton, Willis and Annunziata.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

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


1. Ross invokes proof that he knew the vehicle was occupied only as an element of malice for purposes of the instruction on murder. He acknowledges that such proof was not required to prove manslaughter. Because Ross was not convicted of murder, but was convicted of manslaughter, his contention that the murder instruction was deficient is moot.

2. Because Ross did not present his double-jeopardy contention to the trial court and did not preserve that contention properly for appeal, we will not consider it. Rule 5A:18. The record in this case presents no reason for us to invoke the ends of justice exception to the application of that rule.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Ross v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia. Richmond
Dec 23, 1997
Record No. 0068-97-2 (Va. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 1997)
Case details for

Ross v. Commonwealth

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES NATHANIEL ROSS v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

Court:Court of Appeals of Virginia. Richmond

Date published: Dec 23, 1997

Citations

Record No. 0068-97-2 (Va. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 1997)