Jones v. Commonwealth

Summary

The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed convictions for statutory burglary while armed with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit burglary, and wearing body armor while committing a crime. The court held that the evidence supported findings of intent, conspiracy, and use of qualifying body armor, and that consent to enter did not preclude statutory burglary where the defendant entered with intent to commit assault and battery.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient to establish that Jones intended to commit assault and battery when he entered Outlaw's apartment, including his armed and armored entry, immediate confrontation of Outlaw, attempt to open the bedroom door, and kicking in the door.
2. An occupant's permission or authorization to enter does not preclude a statutory-burglary conviction when the entrant enters with the previously formed intent to commit a felony.
3. The evidence was sufficient to prove that Jones agreed with Callahan and Parker to commit a felony before entering the apartment.
4. The evidence was sufficient to establish that Jones wore body armor while committing a crime of violence and that the bulletproof vest qualified as body armor under Code § 18.2-287.2.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that Jones entered the apartment with the intent to commit assault and battery, an element of statutory burglary.
2. Whether an occupant's apparent permission for Jones to enter the apartment precluded a statutory-burglary conviction.
3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove an agreement between Jones and Callahan to commit a felony, supporting the conspiracy conviction.
4. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that Jones committed a crime of violence while wearing body armor and that the vest qualified as body armor under Code § 18.2-287.2.

Disposition

affirmed