Redmond v. Commonwealth
701 S.E.2d 81
Va. Ct. App.2010Background
- ATF agent received information that Redmond, a felon, possessed firearms at the Middle Road residence listed for sale.
- Agents viewed the home with a realtor on August 3, 2008, observing a glass-front gun cabinet with firearms and ammunition.
- A search-warrant affidavit referenced the August 3 walk-through and observed pawn tickets and firearms, among other items.
- The magistrate issued a warrant on August 11, 2008; police executed it in Redmond’s absence, with Tanya Henry and two children present.
- During the search, police recovered long guns, a pistol, ammunition, and related items; photographs of Redmond with deer were found in the den.
- The Commonwealth proved Redmond deeded the property to himself and Henry as joint tenants in 2006; evidence showed Redmond owned and controlled the premises.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the entry under the pretense of real estate viewing lawful? | Redmond contends the entry violated his Fourth Amendment rights and tainted the warrant. | Commonwealth argues no violation occurred; entry was lawful as a prospective buyer viewing listed property. | Suppression denied; entry lawful under real-estate viewing precedent. |
| Was there sufficient evidence of constructive possession to sustain the firearm conviction? | Redmond argues a lack of ownership and control over firearms in the home. | Commonwealth contends ownership or occupancy, dominion, and knowledge were shown given the residence was jointly owned and firearms were in plain view. | Sufficient evidence of constructive possession; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (U.S. 1967) (privacy expectations and fourth amendment protections)
- Lewis v. United States, 385 U.S. 206 (U.S. 1966) (police entry via subterfuge and real-estate access context)
- Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98 (U.S. 1980) (exclusionary rule and privacy expectations)
- People v. Lucatero, 166 Cal.App.4th 1110 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (pose as potential buyers to investigate without exceeding consent)
- State v. Ferrari, 323 N.J. Super. 54 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1999) (police entering listed property as prospective buyers permissible)
- Burchette v. Commonwealth, 15 Va.App. 432 (Va. Ct. App. 1992) (ownership/dominium inferences for constructive possession)