Muriel Louise Morrison v. Commonwealth of VA ( 2002 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Benton, Annunziata and Humphreys
Argued at Richmond, Virginia
MURIEL LOUISE MORRISON
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 2645-00-2 JUDGE JAMES W. BENTON, JR.
APRIL 23, 2002
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
Robert W. Duling, Judge
Matthew P. Geary for appellant.
John H. McLees, Jr., Senior Assistant
Attorney General (Randolph A. Beales,
Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.
The trial judge convicted Muriel Louise Morrison of felonious
assault and battery of a law enforcement officer in violation of
Code § 18.2-57(C). Morrison contends the evidence was
insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt criminal intent.
We affirm the conviction.
I.
At trial, the evidence proved that Officer Disse and another
officer arrested Morrison on a charge of malicious wounding.
Officer Disse testified that when they arrived at the detention
facility Morrison became "uncooperative" and "a little wild."
After she pushed a chair, acted violently, and screamed, the
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
officers decided to restrain her because of a concern for their
safety and hers. Officer Disse testified that Morrison struggled
with them and, "during the process of her kicking around, she
kicked [Deputy Cirino]." Officer Disse "assum[ed] she was trying
to prevent from being shackled."
Deputy Cirino, who was assigned to the detention facility,
testified that he got involved in the situation because he noticed
Morrison was becoming "extremely aggressive" and verbal. Deputy
Cirino and his supervisor decided Morrison should be put in a full
set of restraints to prevent Morrison from harming herself or
other people. Deputy Cirino testified that, as they tried to
apply the restraints, Morrison begin "to struggle with the
handcuffs and . . . she was starting to kick." He also identified
a photograph showing bruising on his face where Morrison kicked
him. When asked whether he agreed Morrison's kicking him was
inadvertent, Deputy Cirino testified, "Well, in my opinion, she
didn't say –- it wasn't like I wanted to kick Deputy Cirino." He
explained that "[h]er actions in kicking and her actions in
resisting [are] what lead to what happened." He agreed, however,
that when he testified previously he had said he thought it was an
inadvertent kick.
Morrison testified that she was very upset when she was
arrested and that she had wanted to obtain an arrest warrant for
the other persons involved in the altercation. Morrison testified
that after she had waited 15 to 20 minutes in the detention
- 2 -
facility, she wanted to be processed. When the officer said he
would do so when he was ready, she became upset and pushed the
chair to the wall. Morrison testified that when she told the
officer she wanted to sit, the officer told her to sit on the
floor. She said she followed his instruction and sat on the
floor. She testified that when she tried to explain her version
of the events, Deputy Cirino came with handcuffs. She did not
want to be shackled and put her legs under her to avoid being
restrained. She also testified that when an officer pulled one of
her legs, she began "fighting to keep my feet under me" and that
she started kicking her leg after an officer began "holding her
leg and hitting on the top of it." She said she did not intend to
kick Deputy Cirino.
After hearing the evidence, the judge found that Morrison was
not a credible witness. The judge convicted Morrison of assault
and battery of Deputy Cirino.
II.
In pertinent part, Code § 18.2-57(C) provides as follows:
[I]f any person commits an assault or an
assault and battery against another knowing
or having reason to know that such other
person is a law-enforcement officer as
defined hereinafter . . . such person shall
be guilty of a Class 6 felony, and, upon
conviction, the sentence of such person
shall include a mandatory, minimum term of
confinement for six months which mandatory,
minimum term shall not be suspended, in
whole or in part.
- 3 -
"Assault and battery, . . . requires proof of 'an overt act or
an attempt . . . with force and violence, to do physical injury
to the person of another,' 'whether from malice or from
wantonness,' together with 'the actual infliction of corporal
hurt on another . . . wil[l]fully or in anger.'" Boone v.
Commonwealth, 14 Va. App. 130, 132, 415 S.E.2d 250, 251 (1992)
(citations omitted). It has long been the rule in Virginia that
"[a]ny touching by one of the person . . . of another in
rudeness or in anger is an assault and battery." Lynch v.
Commonwealth, 131 Va. 762, 765, 109 S.E. 427, 428 (1921).
The evidence was sufficient for the trial judge to find
beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of assault and battery.
The trial judge expressly found that he disbelieved Morrison's
testimony. The other evidence proved Morrison was angry,
abusive, and generally belligerent while in the detention
facility. "Criminal intent, a state of mind, may be, and often
must be, shown by circumstantial evidence." Whitley v.
Commonwealth, 223 Va. 66, 73, 286 S.E.2d 162, 166 (1982). The
trial judge believed the officers' testimony that they sought to
restrain Morrison after she began shoving furniture and acting
aggressively. In kicking her legs while the officers were close
to her, Morrison acted in a manner of reckless and wanton
disregard for the safety of the officers. Evidence of her
conduct and evidence of her state of mind were sufficient to
prove beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of assault and
- 4 -
battery. See Banovitch v. Commonwealth, 196 Va. 210, 219-20, 83
S.E.2d 369, 374-75 (1954); Boone, 14 Va. App. at 132-33, 415
S.E.2d at 251. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction.
Affirmed.
- 5 -