Michael Jonthan Garland Saunders v. Commonwealth of Virginia
62 Va. App. 793
| Va. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Saunders was convicted (2008) on two counts of consensual sodomy with juveniles under Va. Code § 18.2-361(A), received partially suspended sentences, and later returned to supervised probation.
- Saunders filed pro se motions (2012) seeking to vacate prior orders, arguing the underlying statute was unconstitutional; the trial court denied those motions and Saunders did not timely appeal that denial.
- A probation revocation hearing (Aug. 22, 2012) heard testimony from probation officer Monica Jones based largely on reports by third-party government officials and roommates; the trial court admitted that hearsay evidence over Saunders’s objections, finding it reliable and admitting Jones’s report.
- The trial court found Saunders violated probation (drinking, curfew violation, threats) and imposed three years active incarceration. Saunders argued Lawrence and MacDonald rendered his original conviction void; he also contested hearsay admission, lack of a preliminary Gagnon probable-cause hearing, and sufficiency of evidence.
- The Virginia Court of Appeals affirmed: it held the state Supreme Court’s decision upholding § 18.2-361(A) (McDonald v. Commonwealth) binds this Court, so Saunders’s collateral attack failed; the court also upheld admission of reliable hearsay in revocation proceedings and found any omission of a preliminary hearing harmless after a full evidentiary hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Saunders) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Subject-matter jurisdiction / collateral attack of underlying convictions | Statute (§ 18.2-361(A)) is facially unconstitutional (per Fourth Circuit MacDonald), so original convictions are void and trial court lacked jurisdiction for revocation | Supreme Court of Virginia upheld § 18.2-361(A) in McDonald v. Commonwealth; that holding binds this Court, so convictions are valid | Denied: collateral attack fails because state Supreme Court precedent controls; convictions not void |
| 2) Admission of hearsay / Confrontation Clause | Admission of hearsay testimony and probation report violated Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments; lack of confrontation denied due process | Hearsay was from government officials, corroborated, and found reliable by trial court; revocation hearings allow relaxed rules and admission with good-cause/reliability finding | Denied: trial court properly found hearsay reliable and admitted it under revocation-hearing standards |
| 3) Right to preliminary probable-cause hearing (Gagnon) | Required an initial probable-cause hearing under Gagnon v. Scarpelli; failure requires reversal | Any absence of preliminary hearing is harmless once a full evidentiary revocation hearing is held (Howie precedent) | Denied: no reversible error—full evidentiary hearing mooted preliminary-hearing claim |
| 4) Sufficiency of evidence to revoke probation | Without the contested hearsay, evidence is insufficient to prove violations | Hearsay ruling was proper; with it, sufficient evidence established violations | Denied: sufficiency challenge fails because contested hearsay was admissible and evidence supported revocation |
Key Cases Cited
- Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (U.S. 2003) (established substantive-due-process holding on consensual adult sodomy)
- MacDonald v. Moose, 710 F.3d 154 (4th Cir. 2013) (Fourth Circuit held Va. Code § 18.2-361(A) facially unconstitutional)
- McDonald v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 249, 645 S.E.2d 918 (Va. 2007) (Virginia Supreme Court upheld constitutionality of § 18.2-361(A) as applied to adults/minors)
- Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973) (due-process protections in probation/parole revocation proceedings)
- Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1972) (minimum due-process rights required at parole revocation)
- Henderson v. Commonwealth, 285 Va. 318, 736 S.E.2d 901 (Va. 2013) (articulated reliability and balancing tests for admitting hearsay in revocation hearings)