Timothy Raymond Carter v. Commonwealth of Virginia
0048163
| Va. Ct. App. | Nov 1, 2016Background
- Defendant Timothy R. Carter was convicted in Lee County Circuit Court of second‑degree murder and use of a firearm in commission of murder for the death of his wife, Amy Carter; he did not testify at trial.
- Prosecution evidence: crime‑scene processing, forensic analysis of a .357 revolver (Amy’s and Tim’s DNA on the grip), medical testimony about wound and weapon mechanics, witness statements contradicting Carter’s account, and timeline discrepancies about Carter’s movements after the shooting.
- Carter’s theory at trial: Amy’s death was a suicide and his actions were not criminal; he previously gave statements to police attempting to characterize it as such.
- Post‑conviction motions alleged (inter alia) prosecutorial misconduct (demonstration by prosecutor), juror contact/benefit (prosecutor’s secretary gave a juror a cigarette), improper jury instructions (denial of self‑defense instruction), erroneous declaration of a government witness as hostile, improper admission of prior inconsistent statements, and an invalid search warrant/suppression ruling.
- The trial court denied mistrial and new‑trial motions, admitted certain prior statements and evidence, declared one witness hostile, and denied suppression; Carter appealed to the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Carter) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for second‑degree murder & firearm use | Evidence and inferences supported conviction; jury credited Commonwealth’s theory | Evidence supported suicide theory; physical/forensic evidence inconsistent with homicide finding | Convictions affirmed—evidence sufficient when viewed in light most favorable to Commonwealth |
| Mistrial for prosecutor’s "demonstration" (cross‑examination) | Any error cured by trial court’s prompt instruction to disregard | Demonstration injected prosecutor as witness and prejudiced Carter’s confrontation rights | No abuse of discretion; jury was instructed to disregard and presumption they followed it applied |
| Juror contact / juror received cigarette from prosecutor’s secretary | Contact was innocuous; no discussion of case; cigarette de minimis and didn’t affect deliberations | Any private contact or gift requires mistrial per se; juror bias/impropriety | Trial court’s investigation found no case discussion and no prejudice; denial of new trial upheld |
| Jury instructions — refusal of self‑defense (Instruction 1M) and giving Instruction 1 (mutual combat) | Court gave legally correct instructions; self‑defense requires more than a scintilla of evidence | Court should have instructed on self‑defense because Commonwealth’s evidence allowed it as competing theory | Court properly refused self‑defense instruction—defendant offered less than a scintilla of supporting evidence |
| Declaration of Commonwealth witness (Scott Alford) as hostile; impeachment/admission of prior statement | Declaring witness hostile permitted when testimony deviates; prior inconsistent statement admissible | Trial court erred in declaring Alford hostile and in admitting his prior statement | Court held declaring Alford hostile was an abuse of discretion but error was harmless given the totality of the evidence |
| Denial of motion to suppress search warrant/seized evidence | Affidavit established probable cause (officer personal knowledge, scene inconsistencies, relevant items listed); good‑faith reliance on magistrate | Affidavit lacked nexus, personal knowledge, and was overbroad; seizure unlawful | Denial of suppression affirmed: magistrate could reasonably find probable cause and Leon good‑faith exception applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Smallwood v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 625 (sufficiency review; view evidence for prevailing party)
- Hudson v. Commonwealth, 265 Va. 505 (circumstantial evidence and reasonable‑hypothesis principle)
- Spencer v. Commonwealth, 240 Va. 78 (presumption jury follows cautionary instruction)
- Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209 (juror contact and bias principles)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good‑faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Cary v. Commonwealth, 271 Va. 87 (self‑defense instruction requires more than a scintilla of evidence)