718 S.E.2d 772
Va.2011Background
- Appellant McDowell was convicted in Charlottesville circuit court of violating Va. Code § 18.2-118(b) for failing to return rental property.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that adding 'more accurate information' to the lease address did not defeat the notice requirement.
- On appeal, McDowell argued the notice must be sent exactly to the address on the lease, without any alteration or addition.
- The Supreme Court granted review limited to whether notice to the address, as amended, satisfied the statute's notice requirement to establish fraudulent intent.
- During trial, McDowell’s counsel moved to strike the Commonwealth’s evidence; the circuit court overruled, and trial proceeded with McDowell introducing evidence in his defense.
- The Supreme Court held McDowell waived the issue by not renewing the motion to strike and by not reasserting it in closing argument; it vacated and dismissed the Court of Appeals’ merits ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether notice under § 18.2-118(b) was satisfied when the address on the notice differed from the lease. | McDowell | Commonwealth | Waived; no substantive review |
Key Cases Cited
- Murillo-Rodriguez v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 64 (2010) (waiver requires renewing motion to strike after evidence)
- Spangler v. Commonwealth, 188 Va. 436 (1948) (renewal rule for preservation of issues)
- Gibson v. Commonwealth, 276 Va. 176 (2008) (ends of justice and preservation on appeal; waiver context)