Case Law Seamster v. Commonwealth

Seamster v. Commonwealth

Document Cited Authorities (26) Cited in Related

UNPUBLISHED

Present: Judges Russell, AtLee and Senior Judge Haley

Argued by videoconference

MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY JUDGE JAMES. W. HALEY, JR.
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HALIFAX COUNTY

Kimberley S. White, Judge

Heath L. Sabin (Sabin Law Office, P.C., on brief), for appellant.

Timothy J. Huffstutter, Assistant Attorney General (Mark R. Herring, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Following a bench trial, the trial court convicted Jamie Allen Seamster of receiving or buying stolen goods, possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony, obtaining money by false pretenses, selling stolen property valued at under $200, possession of ammunition for a firearm after having been convicted of a felony, possession of a firearm while possessing a Schedule II controlled substance, and possession of cocaine. On appeal, Seamster argues that the trial court erred in convicting him of both possession of a firearm by a felon and possession of ammunition by a felon in violation of the double jeopardy clause where the two charges "arose out of the same occurrence, and factual pattern, and were not separate incidents of possession." He also argues that the trial court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to convict him of possession of a firearm by a felon "and/or" possession of ammunition by a felon where he

did not have possession, either actual or constructive, of any firearm or ammunition, had no knowledge of a firearm and/orammunition being on the premises, and another person was person [sic]; and not all of firearms recovered were testified to have been designed to expel a projectile by means of an explosion.

Finally, Seamster contends that the trial court erred in finding that the evidence was sufficient to prove that he possessed a firearm while in possession of a Schedule I or II controlled substance "when the evidence did not establish that [he] was in possession of a controlled substance and did not establish[] that he possessed a firearm." Finding that the convictions for both possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony and possession of ammunition after having been convicted of a felony violate the double jeopardy clause, we reverse and remand the case to the trial court for reconsideration of the convictions and sentences for possession of a firearm and possession of ammunition in a manner consistent with this opinion. See Groffel v. Commonwealth, 70 Va. App. 681, 685 (2019), aff'd, 299 Va. 271 (2020). Because on remand, the Commonwealth must elect one conviction and sentence for Seamster's violation of Code § 18.2-308.2, for the reasons stated below, we consider the sufficiency of the evidence and find that the evidence was sufficient to support both convictions. We also find that the evidence was sufficient to prove that Seamster possessed a firearm while in possession of cocaine.

Background

"In accordance with familiar principles of appellate review, the facts will be stated in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party at trial." McGowan v. Commonwealth, 72 Va. App. 513, 516 (2020) (quoting Gerald v. Commonwealth, 295 Va. 469, 472 (2018)). "In doing so, we discard any of appellant's conflicting evidence, and regard as true all credible evidence favorable to the Commonwealth and all inferences that may reasonably be drawn from that evidence." Id. (quoting Gerald, 295 Va. at 473).

In October and November 2017, Lawrence Bradshaw (Lawrence) was staying temporarily at a rehabilitation facility. While he was there, his daughters, Scottie Bradshaw (Scottie) and Kelly Bradshaw (Kelly) maintained their father's house in South Boston. On November 2, 2017, the family saw that a basement window was broken at the house, and a small oil lamp was near the window. Scottie and Kelly walked through the house with Halifax County Sheriff's Investigator Sam Edmonds. They pointed out items that were missing from the house, including bank bags containing paper money, coins, and "old money" Lawrence's grandfather had given him. Also missing were Crown Royal Bags containing coins, a television, a small "saloon gun," and five rifles — three "30/30" Winchester rifles, one .22 Winchester rifle, and a .22 caliber Henry rifle. Three of the Winchester rifles were commemorative. In addition, an "[H]ombre" six-shooter pistol was taken. Further, a National Rifle Association (NRA) backpack, assorted jewelry — including watches, rings, necklaces, and bracelets — collectible swords, and .22 caliber ammunition were missing. Scottie and Kelly testified that no one else had permission to enter the house or remove any items from the residence. Scottie stated that she knew Seamster and he dated her former good friend, Karen Conner.

Edmonds learned that someone had used "old money" for a purchase at a gas station. On November 3, 2017, he reviewed the surveillance video from the gas station and recognized Seamster as the person who passed the old currency. Edmonds also identified Seamster's vehicle in the video. Seamster had left a business card at the gas station that Edmonds recognized as a business associated with Seamster. Edmonds obtained the old currency from the gas station and showed it to Lawrence, who stated that it looked like money that was in his collection. Edmonds also determined that on October 31, 2017, Seamster had pawned a gold bracelet with a charm or medallion at a local pawn shop. Edmonds confiscated the items, which Lawrence identified as belonging to him.

On November 9, 2017, at 7:24 a.m., Edmonds and other officers executed a search warrant at Seamster's residence. At the time of the search, Chris Anderson (Chris), Seamster's cousin, was in the basement of the residence. Edmonds told Seamster that a house in the county had been burglarized, and he determined that Seamster had passed currency that was consistent with some of the money stolen in the burglary. He also told Seamster that he recovered some of the burglary victim's stolen jewelry that Seamster had pawned. Edmonds advised Seamster that they were searching for stolen items, some of which were as small as a buffalo nickel and included weapons. He asked Seamster if he could direct them to any stolen or possibly stolen items in his house. Edmonds testified that Seamster cooperated and identified "things that he believed possibly could have been what [they] w[ere] looking for."

Seamster first directed Edmonds to a bag labeled "NRA" that was on the living room floor, which Seamster said Chris had brought to the residence and could "possibly" have been stolen. The NRA bag contained a small revolver pistol that matched the description of one of the firearms that Lawrence had reported as stolen and Crown Royal bags containing old coins. Edmonds told Seamster that the items were similar to some of the stolen items and asked Seamster if there was anything else in the house that was possibly stolen. Seamster led Edmonds to a guest bedroom closet and pointed to a blanket wrapped in tape and told Edmonds that there were "weapons inside that blanket."1 Edmonds also saw in plain view in the closet another rifle beside the blanket, and a sword. Inside the blanket were commemorative rifles that belonged to Lawrence and some loose ammunition. In a subsequent interview, Seamster told Edmonds that he had helped wrap the rifles in the blanket.

Seamster led Edmonds to what he identified as his bedroom. There, he told Edmonds that a weapon was inside his dresser that "possibly could have been stolen." In the second dresser drawer, Edmonds found a loaded SCCY Cobra .380 caliber pistol and a small gun that Lawrence later identified as his "saloon gun," that was smaller than a Derringer. An expert in the operation of firearms and ammunition testified that the .380 Cobra handgun was operable and capable of creating an explosion and expelling a projectile out of the end of the barrel.2 Seamster claimed that the .380 handgun belonged to Chris but told Edmonds that he knew it was in his dresser drawer. Seamster did not indicate that he knew about the presence of the saloon gun in the drawer.

When Edmonds stated that he was also looking for jewelry, Seamster invoked his Miranda3 rights, and officers arrested him and removed him from the property. The officers continued to search Seamster's house, and under his bed they found two safes. Next to the bed was a set of keys that opened one safe. This safe contained Seamster's social security card, birth certificate, and a Crown Royal bag with jewelry that Lawrence later identified as belonging to him. Edmonds found a gun box containing ammunition on an "end table" in Seamster's bedroom.4

In the kitchen, officers found two driver's licenses, one of which was voided, containing Seamster's name, his address, and business cards like the one Seamster had left at the gas station.The voided driver's license was the one Seamster had provided to complete the pawn transaction on October 31, 2017.

A few days after the search of his home, Seamster asked to speak with law enforcement. During his interview with Edmonds, Seamster claimed that Chris stayed at his house "off and on," and Chris also sometimes stayed at the "bullpen" near an auto mechanic shop. Seamster told Edmonds that Chris gave him "all of the things that [officers] found in his house," and "they had brought them from the bullpen over to his house." Seamster stated that he asked Chris where the items came from and Chris said he "had hit a lick" or had "done a lick," meaning that he had broken into a house. Seamster denied that he broke into Lawrence's house, but he admitted that he helped Chris move items from the bullpen to his house. Seamster also told Edmonds that Chis owed him money and paid Seamster in "old currency," and he bought some old currency from Chris.

Chris told Edmonds that he did not break into Lawrence's house or...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex