Joquan Wayne Hawkins v. Commonwealth of Virginia
64 Va. App. 650
| Va. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Hawkins was convicted in Virginia of aggravated malicious wounding after a jury trial.
- The victim was shot in the abdomen with a .45 caliber Glock; wound was through and through, requiring abdominal surgery.
- The victim was hospitalized for two weeks; a thick, visible surgical scar was produced by the incision.
- Commonwealth offered no medical evidence; the victim reported no ongoing disabilities beyond occasional stomach pain.
- Hawkins moved to strike the aggravated component, arguing the scar was caused by surgery, not the shooting, but the trial court denied the motion.
- The appellate court held the shooting is a proximate cause of the need for surgery and the resulting permanent scar, which satisfies the statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in denying the motion to strike the aggravated charge | Hawkins contends the scar stemmed from surgery, not the shooting | Hawkins argues no direct causation to the surgical scar | No reversible error; sufficient evidence linking shooting to permanent impairment |
| Whether the surgical scar constitutes permanent and significant impairment under the statute | The impairment is the scar from surgery | The scar was caused by surgery, not the shooting | Yes; the scar qualifies as permanent and significant impairment |
| Whether causation is properly attributed to Hawkins despite intervening surgical treatment | The surgery is an intervening event breaking causation | The surgery was a foreseeable consequence of the shooting | Causation established; shooting put into operation the surgery and scar |
Key Cases Cited
- Cirios v. Commonwealth, 7 Va. App. 292, 373 S.E.2d 164 (1988) (tests in ruling on a motion to strike; proximate cause framework)
- Newton v. Commonwealth, 21 Va. App. 86, 462 S.E.2d 117 (1995) (permanent and significant impairment standard for scars)
- Jenkins v. Commonwealth, 255 Va. 516, 499 S.E.2d 263 (1998) (causation chain in homicide-like contexts; liability if injuries lead to death via natural chain)
- Brown v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 523, 685 S.E.2d 43 (2009) (proximate cause; if defendant’s act begins chain leading to outcome, liable)
- Anderson v. State (Minn. Ct. App.), 370 N.W.2d 703 (1985) (surgical scar can constitute serious permanent disfigurement where caused by defendant)
- Gallimore v. Commonwealth, 246 Va. 441, 436 S.E.2d 421 (1993) (proximate cause; intervening events forebear liability only if superseding)
- Delawder v. Commonwealth, 214 Va. 55, 196 S.E.2d 913 (1973) (causal connection; intervening events must not break chain if foreseeable)
- Forbes v. Commonwealth, 27 Va. App. 304, 498 S.E.2d 457 (1998) (negligence and causation issues for jury vs. court)