Tara Monique Thompson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 0842162

Appellant Tara Thompson was convicted in Chesterfield County of felony child neglect under Va. Code § 18.2-371.1(A) for failing to obtain medical care for her 2-year-old son’s burns from hot bacon grease.
The burns occurred accidentally on September 16, 2015; parents agree the initial injury was accidental and not caused by willful conduct.
Father discovered soaked, scabbed, ‘‘thick and slimy’’ discharge from the feet on September 26 and took the child to the ER, where first- and second-degree burns were treated; nurse practitioner testified wounds were healing and vitals were normal.
Nurse testified untreated burns present an infection risk, and she debrided, medicated, and bandaged the child; there was no testimony that an infection or other additional injury had actually occurred prior to hospital treatment.
Appellant did not testify; boyfriend testified that they rinsed the feet, applied ointment, and followed a physician-relative’s advice to wrap and treat the wounds at home.
Trial court found appellant’s failure to provide care ‘‘caused or permitted serious injury’’ by exposing the child to a significant course of infection; the Court of Appeals reviewed sufficiency of evidence under the statute’s plain language.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence proved appellant’s omission caused or permitted a "serious injury" under § 18.2-371.1(A)	Thompson’s omission (failure to obtain professional care) led to or permitted serious injury (infection risk) and supports conviction	No proof that appellant’s omission caused or exacerbated any serious injury beyond the accidental burns; risk of infection is insufficient	Reversed: insufficient evidence—no actual serious injury shown caused or permitted by omission

Beasley v. Commonwealth, 60 Va. App. 381 (standard for viewing evidence in favor of the Commonwealth)
Riner v. Commonwealth, 268 Va. 296 (same evidentiary standard on appeal)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutional sufficiency standard: whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
Kozmina v. Commonwealth, 281 Va. 347 (statutory interpretation follows plain meaning)
Commonwealth v. Duncan, 267 Va. 377 (distinguishing causation requirements in child neglect statute subsections)
Wood v. Commonwealth, 57 Va. App. 286 (interpretation of child neglect statute elements)
Hutton v. Commonwealth, 66 Va. App. 714 (appellate limitation: cannot affirm without proof of each element)