Steven Cornelius Rogers v. Commonwealth of Virginia
1056151
Va. Ct. App.Oct 18, 2016Background
- Rogers was convicted in the Circuit Court of the City of Chesapeake of possessing a firearm as a convicted felon in violation of Code § 18.2-308.2.
- The Commonwealth introduced court orders establishing Rogers’s prior felony convictions, including the sentences received for those convictions.
- Rogers objected to the inclusion of sentencing information in the conviction orders, arguing it was not relevant to the charged offense and was prejudicial.
- The circuit court overruled the objection and admitted unredacted copies of the conviction orders showing the prior sentences.
- A jury convicted Rogers, and the court imposed the jury’s recommended five-year sentence; defense later appealed.
- The appellate court ultimately held the sentencing information was not relevant to the offense and could be deemed harmless error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of sentencing info in prior-conviction orders | Rogers: sentencing data is irrelevant and prejudicial; should be redacted. | Commonwealth: sentencing information may be used to prove prior convictions; Burke permits it, and any error is harmless. | Admission of sentencing info was harmless error. |
| Cure for error via curative instruction | Curative instruction was insufficient to mitigate prejudice. | Curative instruction effectively instructed jurors to disregard sentencing information. | Curative instruction cured the error; no substantial prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burke v. Commonwealth, 27 Va. App. 489, 500 S.E.2d 225 (1998) (sentencing data not relevant to guilt; redaction required)
- Martin v. Commonwealth, No. 0843-15-2, 2016 Va. App. LEXIS 84 (2016) (applies Burke to similar conviction-offense circumstances)
- Clay v. Commonwealth, 262 Va. 253, 546 S.E.2d 728 (2001) (harmless-error standard from Kotteakos framework)
- Lavinder v. Commonwealth, 12 Va. App. 1003, 407 S.E.2d 910 (1991) (curative instruction effectiveness in trial; jurors follow explicit admonitions)
- Seaton v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 739, 595 S.E.2d 9 (2004) (application of curative instruction after jury deliberation)