Terry S. Barksdale v Commonwealth

1074951Vactapp

Gesamter Gesetzestext

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: 	Judges Baker, Willis and Overton
Argued at Norfolk, Virginia
TERRY S. BARKSDALE MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY
v. 	Record No. 1074-95-1 	JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON
JUNE 11, 1996
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK
John E. Clarkson, Judge
Timothy P. Sceviour (Abrons, Fasanaro &
Sceviour, on brief), for appellant.
Marla Graff Decker, Assistant Attorney
General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney
General, on brief), for appellee.
*Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
Terry S. Barksdale was convicted by a jury of attempted
robbery in violation of Code § 18.2-58, use of a firearm in the
commission of a felony in violation of Code § 18.2-53.1, and
unlawful wounding in violation of Code § 18.2-51. 	He argues on
appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support the
convictions.
Upon review of the record, construing the evidence in the
light most favorable to the Commonwealth and granting to it all
reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom, we cannot say
that the decision below was plainly wrong or unsupported by the
evidence.
Accordingly, the convictions are affirmed.
- 2 -
Affirmed.

1 printed pages contain little extracted OCR body text; searchable legal-body completeness has not been established for those pages.

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Baker, Willis and Overton
Argued at Norfolk, Virginia

TERRY S. BARKSDALE
MEMORANDUM OPINION BY
Vv. Record No. 1074-95-1 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON
JUNE 11, 1996
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK
John E. Clarkson, Judge

Timothy P. Sceviour (Abrons, Fasanaro &
Sceviour, on brief), for appellant.

Marla Graff Decker, Assistant Attorney

General (James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney
General, on brief), for appellee.

Terry S. Barksdale was convicted by a jury of attempted
robbery in violation of Code § 18.2-58, use of a firearm in the
commission of a felony in violation of Code § 18.2-53.1, and
unlawful wounding in violation of Code § 18.2-51. He argues on
appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support the
convictions.

Upon review of the record, construing the evidence in the
light most favorable to the Commonwealth and granting to it all
reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom, we cannot say
that the decision below was plainly wrong or unsupported by the
evidence.

Accordingly, the convictions are affirmed.

"Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.

Affirmed.
- 2 -

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.