Taybron v. Commonwealth
57 Va. App. 470
| Va. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- On April 11, 2009, shortly after Taybron’s seventeenth birthday, he and others from a group called the 36th Street Bang Squad battered Clyde Bell at a nightclub.
- On April 17, 2009, police executed arrest and search warrants at Taybron’s residence seeking gang-related evidence; numerous items including a Cincinnati Reds cap with a handwritten nickname and red rosary beads were seized.
- Taybron was indicted in Hampton for gang participation under Code § 18.2-46.2; Detective E.C. Sales testified as a gang expert identifying the Bloods and homegrown Bloods sets.
- The 36th Street Bang Squad was described as affiliated with the Bloods, using symbols, colors, beads, and hand signs; photos showed Taybron wearing Bloods imagery.
- The Commonwealth introduced plea agreements of Arenzo King and Jumar Turner, who claimed Bloods membership, to prove predicate acts; King and Turner were not shown to be members of Taybron’s subset.
- The jury convicted Taybron of participating in a criminal act for the benefit of a criminal street gang, and the trial court sentenced him to five years with substantial suspension, including a Special Condition prohibiting contact with 36th Street Bang Squad members or symbols; on appeal, the conviction was reversed and the indictment dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the gang participation statute is vague or overbroad. | Taybron contends the statute’s scope improperly extends to loosely affiliated subsets. | Commonwealth argues the statute targets a broader criminal street gang defined by shared symbols and acts. | Court did not decide constitutionality; it held the evidence failed to prove Taybron belonged to a criminal street gang. |
| Whether the two plea agreements (King and Turner) could establish predicate acts to prove the gang. | Appellant argues King/Turner were not members of Taybron’s gang or a sufficiently related subset. | Commonwealth relies on those plea agreements to show predicate acts of the Bloods. | Evidence failed to show King/Turner were members of the same organization as Taybron; agreements could not establish requisite predicate acts. |
| Whether the evidence sufficiently proves Taybron belonged to a criminal street gang under Code §§ 18.2-46.1 and -46.2. | Taybron’s subset (36th Street Bang Squad) was not shown to be the same as or closely allied with the Bloods national organization or other predicate actors. | Commonwealth argues common name, ideology, and symbols suffice to prove gang membership. | Evidence failed to prove Taybron and predicate actors belonged to the same ongoing organization; conviction reversed and indictment dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Corado v. Commonwealth, 47 Va.App. 315 (2005) (discusses membership connections for predicate acts in a criminal street gang under Virginia law)
- Hamilton v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 94 (2010) (addresses how predicate acts relate to a gang’s structure and membership)
- Phillips v. Commonwealth, 56 Va.App. 526 (2010) (examines whether predicate acts can be proven by members of related subsets; discusses membership requirements)
- People v. Williams, 167 Cal.App.4th 983 (2008) (California decision on when subsets share enough organizational structure to be treated as a single gang)