Background

• Maurice was convicted in a bench trial of abduction with the intent to defile under Code § 18.2-48.
• Becker shared an apartment with Maurice, her fiancé Adrian Johnson, a male relative Arthur Johnson, and Becker’s two daughters, including the victim D.R., then two years old.
• On November 1, 2013, Becker left D.R. and her sister in the living room while Maurice sat at the dining room table.
• Becker returned to find a baby gate erected, doors to bedrooms closed, and D.R. screaming; Maurice was on Becker’s bed with D.R.
• Becker observed bruising on D.R.’s back and thigh; Dr. Atkinson described bruises consistent with an adult’s fingers holding down a child during a forceful restraint.
• The trial court found that the detention occurred behind a closed door and that Maurice’s actions were not merely incidental to the sexual act, supporting a finding of separate detention and restraint.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Commonwealth v. Hudson, 265 Va. 505 (2003) (evidentiary standard for sufficiency on appeal)
• Kelley v. Commonwealth, 289 Va. 463 (2015) (credibility and favorable-evidence rule on appeal)
• Parks v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 492 (1980) (standard for viewing evidence in favor of Commonwealth)
• Hoyt v. Commonwealth, 44 Va. App. 489 (2004) (abduction/incidental restraint analysis in mixed offenses)
• Smith v. Commonwealth, 56 Va. App. 711 (2010) (deference to trial court's historical findings; de novo application to law)
• Brown v. Commonwealth, 230 Va. 310 (1985) (restraint not intrinsic to certain crimes; separate offense analysis)
• Lawlor v. Commonwealth, 285 Va. 187 (2013) (detention not inherently required for other offenses; separate-detention test)
• Powell v. Commonwealth, 261 Va. 512 (2001) (greater restraint than necessary to commit sexual offenses)
• Coram v. Commonwealth, 3 Va. App. 623 (1997) (risk of harm increased by secluded locale; deterrence rationale)
• Epps v. Commonwealth, 66 Va. App. 393 (2016) (broader framework for abduction versus intrinsic restraints)