section 18.2-47(a) offenses of abduction in Virginia

2010Code § 18.2-47(A) defines abduction generally and states in pertinent part, that “[a]ny person, who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty . . . shall be deemed guilty of ‘abduction’ . . . .” Code § 18.2-48(ii) in turn, provides a more severe punishment for abduction - 10 - “of any person with intent to defile such person.” See McKinley v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 1, 4 , 225 S.E.2d 352, 353 (1976) (“distinguishing feat

2010Code § 18.2-47(A) defines abduction generally and states in pertinent part, that “[a]ny person, who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty . . . shall be deemed guilty of ‘abduction’ . . . .” Code § 18.2-48(ii) in turn, provides a more severe punishment for abduction - 10 - “of any person with intent to defile such person.” See McKinley v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 1, 4 , 225 S.E.2d 352, 353 (1976) (“distinguishing feat

2010Code § 18.2-47(A) defines abduction generally and states in pertinent part, that “[a]ny person, who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty . . . shall be deemed guilty of ‘abduction’ . . . .” Code § 18.2-48(ii) in turn, provides a more severe punishment for abduction - 10 - “of any person with intent to defile such person.” See McKinley v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 1, 4 , 225 S.E.2d 352, 353 (1976) (“distinguishing feat

2010Code § 18.2-47(A) defines abduction generally and states in pertinent part, that “[a]ny person, who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty . . . shall be deemed guilty of ‘abduction’ . . . .” Code § 18.2-48(ii) in turn, provides a more severe punishment for abduction - 10 - “of any person with intent to defile such person.” See McKinley v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 1, 4 , 225 S.E.2d 352, 353 (1976) (“distinguishing feat

2026To obtain a conviction for abduction under Code § 18.2-47, the evidence need only show, without more, the “physical detention of a person, with the intent to deprive [her] of [her] personal liberty, by force, intimidation, or deception.” Walker v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. App. 114, 120 (2005) (quoting Scott v. Commonwealth, 228 Va. 519, 526 (1984)).

1986The Supreme Court confronted the issue of whether asportation is necessary for abduction under Code § 18.2-47 in Scott v. Commonwealth, 228 Va. 519 , 323 S.E.2d 572 (1984).

2010Jerman, 267 Va. at 439 , 593 S.E.2d at 259 ; see John L.

2010Jerman, 267 Va. at 439 , 593 S.E.2d at 259 ; see John L.

2026To obtain a conviction for abduction under Code § 18.2-47, the evidence need only show, without more, the “physical detention of a person, with the intent to deprive [her] of [her] personal liberty, by force, intimidation, or deception.” Walker v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. App. 114, 120 (2005) (quoting Scott v. Commonwealth, 228 Va. 519, 526 (1984)).

2026Force requires “evidence of ‘some array or show of force in form sufficient to overcome resistance’” and “must be used to overcome the victim’s will.” Sabol v. Commonwealth, 37 Va. App. 9, 16 (2001) (quoting Jones v. Commonwealth, 219 Va. 983, 986 (1979)).

2026Force requires “evidence of ‘some array or show of force in form sufficient to overcome resistance’” and “must be used to overcome the victim’s will.” Sabol v. Commonwealth, 37 Va. App. 9, 16 (2001) (quoting Jones v. Commonwealth, 219 Va. 983, 986 (1979)).

2023Accordingly, because appellant’s abduction of J.O. is punishable as contempt of court for violating the March PPO, his prosecution for abduction under Code § 18.2-47 is restricted to a Class 1 misdemeanor by subsection (D).19 See Thompson v. Commonwealth, 73 Va. App. 721 , 728 (2021) (quoting Amonett v. Commonwealth, 70 Va. App. 1, 10 (2019)). 18 This Court notes that the General Assembly knows how to write express language to exclude contempt as a possible punishment, including in the context of protective orders.

2023See Marvin v. Marvin, 51 Va. App. 619 , charge under Code § 18.2-47 simply by choosing not to also charge appellant with contempt.

2017This determination presents a factual question which lies peculiarly within the province of the [fact finder].” Ingram v. Commonwealth, 192 Va. 794, 801-02 , 66 S.E.2d 846, 849 (1951).

2017This determination presents a factual question which lies peculiarly within the province of the [fact finder].” Ingram v. Commonwealth, 192 Va. 794, 801-02 , 66 S.E.2d 846, 849 (1951).

2012Code § 18.2-48 states in relevant part, “[a]bduction . . . of any person with intent to defile such person . . . shall be a Class 2 felony.” “The crime incorporates the charge of abduction under Code § 18.2-47(A),” Crawford v. Commonwealth, 281 Va. 84, 102 , 704 S.E.2d 107, 118 (2011), which states “[a]ny person who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal -2- justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty . . . shall be guilty of ‘abduction.’” Appellant contends

2012Code § 18.2-48 states in relevant part, “[a]bduction . . . of any person with intent to defile such person . . . shall be a Class 2 felony.” “The crime incorporates the charge of abduction under Code § 18.2-47(A),” Crawford v. Commonwealth, 281 Va. 84, 102 , 704 S.E.2d 107, 118 (2011), which states “[a]ny person who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal -2- justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty . . . shall be guilty of ‘abduction.’” Appellant contends

2000Appellant argues that Professor Groot concludes the level of risk associated with Code § 18.2-48 makes the offense a proper predicate felony for the purpose of a finding of guilt under Code § 18.2-32 but the level of risk associated with an offense under Code § 18.2-47 does not qualify that offense as a predicate felony. “ “Where a statute is unambiguous, the plain meaning is to be accepted without resort to the rules of statutory interpretation.’ ” Sykes v. Commonwealth, 27 Va.App. 77, 80 , 497 S.E.2d 511, 512 (1998) (quoting Last v. Virginia State Bd. of Medicine, 14 Va.App. 906, 910 , 421 S

2000Appellant argues that Professor Groot concludes the level of risk associated with Code § 18.2-48 makes the offense a proper predicate felony for the purpose of a finding of guilt under Code § 18.2-32 but the level of risk associated with an offense under Code § 18.2-47 does not qualify that offense as a predicate felony. “ “Where a statute is unambiguous, the plain meaning is to be accepted without resort to the rules of statutory interpretation.’ ” Sykes v. Commonwealth, 27 Va.App. 77, 80 , 497 S.E.2d 511, 512 (1998) (quoting Last v. Virginia State Bd. of Medicine, 14 Va.App. 906, 910 , 421 S

2000Appellant argues that Professor Groot concludes the level of risk associated with Code § 18.2-48 makes the offense a proper predicate felony for the purpose of a finding of guilt under Code § 18.2-32 but the level of risk associated with an offense under Code § 18.2-47 does not qualify that offense as a predicate felony. “ “Where a statute is unambiguous, the plain meaning is to be accepted without resort to the rules of statutory interpretation.’ ” Sykes v. Commonwealth, 27 Va.App. 77, 80 , 497 S.E.2d 511, 512 (1998) (quoting Last v. Virginia State Bd. of Medicine, 14 Va.App. 906, 910 , 421 S

2000Appellant argues that Professor Groot concludes the level of risk associated with Code § 18.2-48 makes the offense a proper predicate felony for the purpose of a finding of guilt under Code § 18.2-32 but the level of risk associated with an offense under Code § 18.2-47 does not qualify that offense as a predicate felony. “ “Where a statute is unambiguous, the plain meaning is to be accepted without resort to the rules of statutory interpretation.’ ” Sykes v. Commonwealth, 27 Va.App. 77, 80 , 497 S.E.2d 511, 512 (1998) (quoting Last v. Virginia State Bd. of Medicine, 14 Va.App. 906, 910 , 421 S

1999In reviewing the sufficiency of evidence on appeal, “the appellate court must examine the evidence and all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party in the trial court.” Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 521, 499 S.E.2d 263, 265 (1998).

1999In reviewing the sufficiency of evidence on appeal, “the appellate court must examine the evidence and all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the prevailing party in the trial court.” Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 521, 499 S.E.2d 263, 265 (1998).