850 S.E.2d 376
Va. Ct. App.2020Background
- On Nov. 24, 2018 L.M. obtained a permanent protective order prohibiting Troy McGowan from any contact and from committing acts of family abuse or criminal offenses causing injury.
- On Dec. 13, 2018 McGowan went to L.M.’s home, entered without permission, followed her into a bedroom, and (according to L.M.) bit her on the knee/leg while she was holding their child.
- L.M. screamed after the bite, reported the incident to police a few hours later, and allowed an officer to photograph a discolored spot on her kneecap; she also testified she has a hypomelanosis skin condition that can cause discoloration.
- McGowan was tried and convicted of violating the protective order by committing an assault and battery that resulted in bodily injury (Code § 16.1-253.2(C)) and of assault and battery of a family member; he appealed only the § 16.1-253.2(C) conviction.
- At trial the court credited L.M.’s testimony (noting possible untruths to the officer) and concluded the bite and unauthorized contact violated the protective order and resulted in bodily injury.
- On appeal the Court of Appeals reviewed sufficiency of the evidence de novo under the familiar standard of viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence proved a "bodily injury" under Code § 16.1-253.2(C) | Commonwealth: L.M. screamed after being bitten and permitted a police photo of the injured area a few hours later; these facts support a bodily injury. | McGowan: No proof of actual injury — no observable bite mark, and discoloration could be from L.M.’s skin condition. | The court held the statutory phrase "bodily injury" has a broad meaning (any bodily hurt or impairment); L.M.’s scream after the bite and the photographed discoloration provided enough evidence for a rational factfinder to conclude a bodily injury occurred; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Nolen v. Commonwealth, 53 Va. App. 593 (2009) (defined "bodily injury" as "any bodily hurt whatsoever" and explained when "serious" qualifies)
- English v. Commonwealth, 58 Va. App. 711 (2011) (held bodily injury includes any detriment, hurt, loss, or impairment and need not show external wounds)
- Ricks v. Commonwealth, 290 Va. 470 (2015) (construed bodily injury broadly to include impairment of bodily function or condition)
- Bryant v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 310 (1949) (early authoritative definition of "bodily injury")
- Luck v. Commonwealth, 32 Va. App. 827 (2000) (reiterated that bodily injury need not include visible cuts or bruises)
- Johnson v. Commonwealth, 184 Va. 409 (1945) (interpreted "injury" to include detriment or impairment)