Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Virginia court upholds rape conviction despite juror bias claims

Virginia court upholds rape conviction despite juror bias claims

Listen to this article
Summary:
  • Court of Appeals of Virginia panel upholds convictions
  • sentenced to two life terms
  • Chief Justice Marla Graff Decker authors opinion

A three-judge Court of Appeals of Virginia panel has upheld a Hopewell man’s two convictions of rape, saying jury members’ personal experiences with similar crimes should not disqualify them from service if a judge is convinced they could be impartial.

A Colonial Heights Circuit Court jury convicted Bobby Gerard Clary in 2024 on two counts of rape by force, threat or intimidation. Court records indicate that over a period of several years, Clary repeatedly raped the victim, with one of those attacks resulting in a pregnancy. Last year, he was sentenced to two life terms in prison. Court records show Clary and the victim knew each other.

Clary’s defense counsel appealed the convictions, claiming that two of the jurors admitted to personal experiences with during the selection phase and should not have been seated. One of them said his spouse was abused as a minor, and the other said she was attacked by a co-worker, but both maintained they could be impartial in deliberations and were picked over the objections of the defense.

In the opinion, released June 23 and written by Chief Justice Marla Graff Decker, the panel ruled that there was no actual bias proven, and the Circuit Court judge hearing the case was rightfully convinced that the two jurors could be impartial. The man “never said he couldn’t be fair,” according to the record, while the woman clearly said she could “put aside her experience” and decide the case on the law and evidence.

“The trial court – not the appellate court – has the opportunity to ‘see and hear’ each prospective juror respond to questions posed during ,” the opinion read. “As the trial court listens to responses, it can observe the ‘inflections, tone and tenor of the dialogue, and [the] general demeanor’ of the juror, putting it in the ‘best position’ to make determinations of qualification.”

As a result, the panel said it could not find any proof of .

Reporting by Bill Atkinson, Petersburg Progress-Index

Legal Tech

See All Legal Tech News

Verdicts & Settlements

See All Verdicts & Settlements

Opinion Digests

See All Digests