Christopher Lee Watson v. Commonwealth of Virginia
1214162
| Va. Ct. App. | Jun 27, 2017Background
- Watson, a convicted felon, was stopped in his vehicle on August 1, 2015; he was the sole occupant at the time.
- A canine alerted to drugs in the front center console; that search eventually led officers to the trunk where a Smith & Wesson semi-automatic handgun was found.
- The vehicle was jointly registered to Watson and his girlfriend.
- After discovery, Watson calmly tried to negotiate release by asking if the officer would let him go if he could get “two more guns.”
- While within earshot of the arresting officer, Watson called his girlfriend and said, “They found the gun, I’m going to jail.”
- Watson moved to strike the evidence arguing insufficient proof he knew of the gun; the circuit court denied the motion and convicted him under Va. Code § 18.2-308.2 for possession of a firearm by a felon. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that Watson knowingly possessed the firearm | Commonwealth: circumstantial evidence (sole occupant, joint registration, statements, demeanor, phone call) established knowledge and constructive possession | Watson: no direct/forensic evidence placing gun in his possession; trunk location undermines knowledge | Affirmed — totality of circumstances (including his statement “They found the gun”) supported a finding of guilty knowledge and constructive possession |
| Reliance on constructive-possession doctrine | Commonwealth: constructive possession based on acts, statements, proximity, and exclusive access supports conviction | Watson: constructive-possession inference insufficient without actual possession or clearer proof of knowledge | Affirmed — constructive possession may be proved by circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences from the facts presented |
Key Cases Cited
- Blow v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 533 (deference to factfinder on credibility and sufficiency review)
- Bolden v. Commonwealth, 275 Va. 144 (conviction may rest on constructive possession)
- Smallwood v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 625 (constructive-possession is a factual determination)
- Gregory v. Commonwealth, 28 Va. App. 393 (ownership/occupancy and proximity are probative for possession)
- Ervin v. Commonwealth, 57 Va. App. 495 (sole occupant/sole access weighs toward guilty knowledge)
- Rawls v. Commonwealth, 272 Va. 334 (elements for proving constructive possession)
- Walton v. Commonwealth, 255 Va. 422 (trial court credibility determinations afforded great deference)