Jackie Costello Ingram v. Commonwealth ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                      COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
    Present: Judges Baker, Annunziata and Overton
    Argued at Alexandria, Virginia
    JACKIE COSTELLO INGRAM
    v.         Record Nos. 0721-95-4 and       MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
    0722-95-4        JUDGE ROSEMARIE ANNUNZIATA
    JANUARY 23, 1996
    COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
    FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY
    William L. Winston, Judge
    Conrad C. Gaarder, for appellant.
    John K. Bynum, Jr., Assistant Attorney
    General (James S. Gilmore III, Attorney
    General; Steven A. Witmer, Assistant Attorney
    General, on brief), for appellee.
    Following a jury trial on October 12, 1994, appellant,
    Jackie Costello Ingram ("Ingram"), was convicted of distribution
    of an imitation controlled substance within 1000 feet of school
    property and distribution of an imitation controlled substance.
    Ingram was sentenced, respectively, to three years imprisonment
    and $1500 and one year and $500.    On appeal, Ingram contends the
    trial court erred in admitting into evidence a certified
    photocopy of the original Certificate of Analysis.    We disagree
    and affirm.
    Ingram sold imitation crack cocaine to an undercover police
    officer within 100 yards of an elementary school.    At trial, the
    Commonwealth sought to introduce into evidence a certified
    *
    Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
    designated for publication.
    photocopy of the original Certificate of Analysis, previously
    identified by a Commonwealth witness as a "xeroxed copy of the
    original certificate for analysis."     Ingram's contention that the
    photocopy was hearsay and that only the original could be
    admitted is without merit.
    First, Ingram waived his claim because he did not accept the
    Commonwealth's offer to retrieve the original certificate after
    the court asked Ingram if he wanted it.     See Rule 5A:18.   Ingram
    cannot invite error and then take advantage of the situation he
    created.    See, e.g., Manns v. Commonwealth, 
    13 Va. App. 677
    ,
    679-80, 
    414 S.E.2d 613
    , 615 (1992).
    Second, even absent waiver, the trial court's decision must
    be affirmed.   As a matter of law, official records shall be
    received as evidence when authenticated and certified by the
    clerk to be a true record.   Code § 8.01-389(A).   A copy of such a
    record is admissible if it is authenticated.    Code § 8.01-391(C);
    Proctor v. Commonwealth, 
    14 Va. App. 937
    , 938-39, 
    419 S.E.2d 867
    ,
    867-68 (1992).   "Authenticated" and "certified" are synonymous
    terms in this context.    Owens v. Commonwealth, 
    10 Va. App. 309
    ,
    311, 
    391 S.E.2d 605
    , 605-06 (1990) (concluding that clerk's
    certification of copy of record properly authenticated record
    pursuant to Code § 8.01-389).   The clerk's certification that the
    document in this case is a true copy meets the statutory standard
    for admissibility.   Accordingly, the appellant's conviction is
    affirmed.
    - 2 -
    Affirmed.
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 0721954

Filed Date: 1/23/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021