Joshua Saquan Maurice Eley v. Commonwealth of Virginia
70 Va. App. 158
| Va. Ct. App. | 2019Background
- On Oct. 10, 2017, police found Joshua Eley in the driver’s seat of a pickup truck that had been reported stolen; Eley admitted getting the vehicle from someone he did not know well and felt something was wrong with it, but did not admit knowing it was stolen at the scene.
- Police recovered a loaded .357 semi-automatic handgun with a 31-round extended magazine secured in the truck’s center console.
- Eley pleaded guilty to receiving stolen property (possession of the truck) but pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor possession of a firearm with a magazine capacity of 20+ rounds, in violation of Va. Code § 18.2-287.4.
- At trial Eley moved to strike, claiming an exemption in Va. Code § 18.2-308(C)(8) that permits possession of a secured handgun in "a personal, private motor vehicle."
- The Commonwealth conceded two elements of the exemption (lawful possession of a firearm; firearm secured in a compartment) but disputed whether the vehicle qualified as "a personal, private motor vehicle."
- The trial court denied the motion; on appeal the Court of Appeals reviewed statutory interpretation de novo and affirmed, concluding the exemption does not cover firearms secured in vehicles the possessor knows to be stolen.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Eley) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 18.2-308(C)(8)’s exemption for a firearm secured in "a personal, private motor vehicle" applies where the vehicle is stolen | The exemption covers any non-public vehicle used by an individual for personal travel; ownership or lawful possession is not required | "Personal, private" requires more than non-public use; a vehicle must be one the possessor lawfully owns or is authorized to use — a stolen vehicle does not qualify | Exemption does not apply where defendant knew the vehicle was stolen; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Hodges v. Commonwealth, 64 Va. App. 687 (Va. Ct. App. 2015) (mixed question of law and fact; statutory-exemption burden)
- Doulgerakis v. Commonwealth, 61 Va. App. 417 (Va. Ct. App. 2013) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
- Wright v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 754 (Va. 2009) (apply plain meaning unless ambiguous)
- Logan v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. App. 168 (Va. Ct. App. 2005) (factual concessions and appellate review)
- Byrd v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1518 (U.S. 2018) (a car thief lacks a reasonable expectation of privacy in a stolen car)