John Wilkes Trent, Sr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia
0350173
| Va. Ct. App. | Dec 19, 2017Background
- In early 2016 Investigator Roane probed allegations that John Wilkes Trent, Sr. supplied drugs to several minor boys; he searched Trent’s home (with consent) and found methamphetamine, oxycodone, marijuana, and drug paraphernalia. Trent admitted giving pills to one boy (N.F.).
- Trent gave a videotaped, Miranda‑advised interview in which he admitted providing drugs, masturbating in the boys’ presence, and performing oral sex on N.F.; he later recanted at trial, claiming his admissions were sarcastic.
- Several minor witnesses (N.F., C.F., A.S., J.T.) testified that they frequently visited Trent’s home to use drugs and corroborated many details of Trent’s interview (visits, drugs, methods of use, who was present); N.F. became upset and refused to describe sexual acts, saying only that “some ‘sex stuff’” occurred.
- After the Commonwealth rested, the trial court struck one possession count (CR16000133‑02) on double jeopardy grounds because it duplicated another possession charge, but the court later convicted Trent on that same count and other possession counts and convicted him of carnal knowledge of a minor.
- On appeal Trent argued (1) insufficient corroboration of his extrajudicial confession to establish corpus delicti for carnal knowledge, and (2) erroneous conviction and sentencing on the dismissed possession count (double jeopardy). The Court of Appeals affirmed the sex conviction, reversed and dismissed the duplicated possession conviction, and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Trent) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient corroboration of Trent’s extrajudicial confession to establish corpus delicti for carnal knowledge of a minor | The confession is corroborated by multiple witnesses who confirmed visits, drug use, mutual masturbation, and details matching the confession; only slight corroboration is required for a full confession | The confession was uncorroborated or only showed opportunity; thus conviction cannot rest solely on the extrajudicial admission | Court: Affirmed. Multiple witnesses corroborated significant details beyond mere opportunity, providing the required "slight corroboration." |
| Whether convicting/sentencing Trent on a possession count (CR16000133‑02) already struck for double jeopardy was lawful; whether Rule 5A:18 bars appellate review | Trent invoked the ends‑of‑justice exception because this resulted in a conviction for conduct that was not criminal (previously dismissed), constituting a clear miscarriage of justice | Commonwealth conceded error but appellate courts review legal questions independently | Court: Reversed and dismissed CR16000133‑02. Ends‑of‑justice exception applied; conviction on a previously‑dismissed, duplicative count violated double jeopardy; remand for resentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Allen v. Commonwealth, 287 Va. 68 (discusses insufficiency of mere opportunity as corroboration for confession)
- Cherrix v. Commonwealth, 257 Va. 292 (confession requires only "slight corroboration")
- Watkins v. Commonwealth, 238 Va. 341 (corroboration of confession may be circumstantial or direct)
- Winston v. Commonwealth, 268 Va. 564 (corroborative evidence need not prove elements established by confession if consistent with reasonable inference)
- Morning v. Commonwealth, 37 Va. App. 679 (victim’s corroboration of surrounding facts can supply slight corroboration despite denial of the sexual act)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard of review for sufficiency: whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161 (double jeopardy protects against multiple prosecutions/convictions for the same offense)