Collins v. Commonwealth

Collins · Supreme Court of Virginia · January 13, 2012 · No. 110067

Summary

The Supreme Court of Virginia considered whether an out-of-state-licensed bail bondsman could enter Virginia and apprehend a fugitive without a Virginia license. The court held that Virginia's statutory regulation of bail bondsmen and bail enforcement agents abrogated any applicable common-law authority, leaving the defendant without legal justification to use force to detain the person he mistakenly believed was the fugitive. The court also held that the evidence established the requisite intent for attempted abduction and affirmed the Court of Appeals judgment.

Court
Supreme Court of Virginia
Writing for the Court
Senior Justice Harry L. Carrico; Chief Justice Kinser; Justice Lemons; Justice Goodwyn; Justice Millette; Justice Mims; Senior Justice Carrico; Senior Justice Koontz
Jurisdiction
Virginia
Decision date
January 13, 2012
Docket number
110067
Procedural posture
Collins appealed convictions for attempted abduction and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. The Court of Appeals of Virginia affirmed, and the Supreme Court of Virginia granted an appeal and affirmed.
Standard of review
De novo review applies because the interpretation and application of the statutory changes presented a pure question of law.
Precedential value
Published opinion; precedential
Parties
Clifton L. Collins v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedurestatutory interpretationappellate procedurestandard of reviewmens rea

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedurebail and bail enforcementstatutory interpretationappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Virginia's statutory regulation of bail bondsmen and bail enforcement agents abrogated any common-law authority of an out-of-state-licensed bondsman to enter Virginia and apprehend a fugitive bailee without a Virginia license.
  2. Whether Collins's mistake of identity and subsequent abandonment of the attempted detention negated the specific intent required for attempted abduction.

Holdings

  1. Virginia's statutory licensing and regulatory scheme plainly abrogated any common-law rule that allowed out-of-state bail bondsmen or bounty hunters to enter Virginia and apprehend fugitive bailees without being licensed in Virginia.
  2. Collins's mistake of identity did not negate the specific intent for attempted abduction because, without a valid legal privilege, he had no legal justification to use force to detain anyone. His abandonment also came too late because the attempt was complete when his conduct amounted to an indictable attempt.

Key quotations

We cannot perceive how the General Assembly could have more plainly manifested its intent to abrogate the long standing common law rule allowing out-of-state bail bondsmen and bounty hunters to enter Virginia to apprehend fugitive bailees. (at 8)
Without the common law rule to protect him, he had no privilege to use force to detain anyone, including Sydnor, had he been on the scene instead of the Deputy Chief. (at 9)
But the abandonment came too late. At that point, the attempt was complete. (at 10)

Factual background

Collins, a North Carolina-licensed bail bondsman who was not licensed in Virginia, traveled to Mecklenburg County to apprehend James R. Sydnor, a fugitive bailee. Collins mistakenly identified a Virginia deputy chief of police as Sydnor, approached him with a Glock pistol, used force to pull him toward a truck, and allowed an employee armed with mace and a handgun to confront him. Collins released the deputy chief and left after the deputy chief identified himself, but was later indicted and convicted of attempted abduction and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony.

Procedural history

After a bench trial in the Circuit Court of Mecklenburg County, Collins was convicted of attempted abduction under Code §§ 18.2-26 and 18.2-47 and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony under Code § 18.2-53.1. The circuit court imposed five years' incarceration on the attempted-abduction conviction, all suspended, and the mandatory three-year sentence on the firearm conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed in a published opinion, and the Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed that judgment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…