Frank Small v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 1722151

Victim Wilfrid Gwaltney (about 80 years old) hired Harry Small to repair his driveway; Harry brought Benny York and appellant Frank Small to perform the work.
After completing more work than requested, the men demanded $8,100; Gwaltney believed a full dump-truck load of gravel would cost about $300.
Appellant, standing near Gwaltney with a shovel, threatened that Gwaltney’s children would find him behind his house if he didn’t pay; Gwaltney perceived the shovel-tapping as a present threat.
Fearful, Gwaltney drove to the bank, withdrew eighty-one $100 bills (the bulk of his account), while appellant followed and waited at a gas station; Gwaltney handed the cash to appellant.
A jury convicted appellant of robbery (Va. Code § 18.2-58); the trial court found the victim credible and denied a motion to set aside the verdict.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the intimidation was sufficiently contemporaneous with the taking to constitute robbery	Commonwealth: Victim remained intimidated; intimidation need not be immediate if it caused the taking	Small: Intimidation did not occur contemporaneously—different location, time lapse, and alleged lack of fear at handover	Court: Intimidation need only precede or be concomitant if it caused the taking; juror could find victim’s will overborne and affirm robbery

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Mason v. Commonwealth, 200 Va. 253 (intimidation must precede or be concomitant with taking to support robbery)
Seaton v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 739 ("fear" means apprehension that overbears will; victim may yield despite bravery)
Bivens v. Commonwealth, 19 Va. App. 750 (robbery defined as taking by force, threat, or intimidation)
Sutton v. Commonwealth, 228 Va. 654 (victim’s fear can be judged objectively; fear may be reasonable given circumstances)