Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Opinion Digests / Criminal Law / Sufficient evidence of assault and obstruction

Sufficient evidence of assault and obstruction

Where appellant was convicted for assaulting a police officer and obstructing justice, there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions.

Police were called to break up a fight at a bus stop between appellant and Christian. Appellant interfered with the responding officers’ investigation of the matter. She had to be restrained and eventually was shackled before being transported to the police station. She appeals her convictions for obstruction of justice and assault and battery of a police officer.


“[W]hile Officer File investigated the incident by interviewing witnesses, [appellant] Robinson repeatedly interrupted her, talked over the officer, and prevented her from speaking with people on the scene. Officer Dondero had to move Robinson from the area so Officer File could conduct her investigation, thus preventing Officer Dondero from assisting with the interviews.

“Further, when Officer File approached Robinson to search her, Robinson turned, kicked her, and then struggled with the officers, preventing Officer File from accomplishing the search.

“Finally, Robinson resisted Dondero’s attempts to stop her from kicking the police car window, and only after backup officers arrived and shackled her were the officers able to transport her to the police station.

“Thus, Robinson forcefully resisted the officers’ commands and prevented the officers from accomplishing their duties. Accordingly, the evidence proved Robinson obstructed the officers.”

Assault and battery

“Robinson argues that the evidence failed to establish that she ‘had any willful intention to physically harm either officer.’ Instead, she asserts, she simply ‘was very upset from having already been assaulted by another (Christian) and her frustration about that situation’ and did not want to be touched. …

“Robinson was argumentative and combative with the officers from the moment they arrived on the scene. After Robinson refused to identify herself, she cursed at Officer File and disrupted her investigation of the incident to such a degree that Officer Dondero had to remove Robinson from the area.

“After struggling with Officer Dondero, Robinson announced her specific intent to ‘assault’ any officer who attempted to search her. When Officer File, the only female officer then on the scene, approached to conduct the search, Robinson immediately acted consistently with her stated intention and kicked Officer File.

“Robinson then resisted the officers’ attempts to subdue her. Only after another officer arrived on the scene were the police able to conduct the search. Even after striking Officer File, Robinson continued to fight with the officers, requiring them to shackle her before she could be transported to the police station.

“Robinson’s statements, behavior, and acts amply demonstrate that she acted with the requisite intent.”


Robinson v. Commonwealth, Record No. 1271-21-3, Aug. 9, 2022. CAV (Humphreys) From the Circuit Court of the City of Lynchburg (Watson) Jennifer T. Stanton for appellant. Robin M. Nagel, Jason S. Miyares for appellee. VLW 022-7-306, 8 pp. Unpublished opinion.

VLW 022-7-306

Virginia Lawyers Weekly