Timothy Kenneth Bartley v. Commonwealth of Virginia
67 Va. App. 740
| Va. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Police executed a search warrant at a suspected meth distributor’s residence that expressly authorized searching the residence, “all persons therein,” and “all vehicles associated” with the residence.
- During the search, the distributor (warrant target) called Timothy Bartley and, with police agreement, placed an order for methamphetamine so Bartley would come to the residence.
- When Bartley arrived, officers searched his vehicle and recovered scales with methamphetamine residue; Bartley was charged with possession of methamphetamine (Va. Code § 18.2-250).
- At trial Bartley moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the police had “lured” him to the location to bring him within the warrant’s scope and lacked probable cause to search his car without a separate warrant.
- On appeal Bartley’s opening brief presented conclusory assertions without legal analysis or supporting authority as required by Rule 5A:20(e).
- The Court of Appeals deemed Bartley’s sole assignment of error waived for failure to comply with Rule 5A:20(e) and affirmed the conviction without reaching the merits of the warrant/scope/probable-cause issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of searching Bartley’s vehicle during execution of a warrant at the residence | Bartley: police lured him to the premises to bring him within the warrant’s scope; search therefore unlawful | Commonwealth: the warrant covered persons and vehicles at the address and vehicles arriving during execution; search lawful | Waived — appeal dismissed for failing to provide legal argument/authority under Rule 5A:20(e) |
| Probable cause for a warrantless vehicle search | Bartley: no probable cause because the distributor was an unreliable informant | Commonwealth: officers could rely on the distributor’s identification and surrounding circumstances to support search (argued below) | Waived — court did not decide on probable cause due to Rule 5A:20(e) failure |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. Commonwealth, 51 Va. App. 730 (660 S.E.2d 343) (Rule 5A:20(e) requires briefs to present law, argument, and authority)
- Lebedun v. Commonwealth, 27 Va. App. 697 (501 S.E.2d 427) (search-warrant presumptions and related principles)
- Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (vehicle-search doctrine for warrantless searches when probable cause exists)
- Towler v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 533 (221 S.E.2d 119) (consequences of procedural/default failures in appellate practice)