Criminal – Court rejects defendant’s Batson challenge

Where the Commonwealth offered race-neutral reasons for each strike, the trial court credited the Commonwealth’s “nondiscriminatory bases” for its preemptory strikes and the defendant’s true quarrel was with the “social racial dynamics of this jury pool,” his Batson challenge failed.

Background

A jury convicted Roscoe Walter Johnson of abduction, unlawful wounding, leaving the scene of an accident, misdemeanor domestic assault and battery, reckless driving and eluding.

Batson

Johnson conceded the prosecutor’s good-faith and argued that the true issue was the “social racial dynamics of this jury pool.” The Commonwealth offered race-neutral reasons for each strike: one juror cared for a baby at home, the other juror had not actively participated during voir dire.

The trial court credited the Commonwealth’s “nondiscriminatory bases” for its preemptory strikes. Considering the credibility finding and Johnson’s own candid admission that the true problem was with the jury pool itself, Johnson failed to carry his burden of persuasion to prove that the prosecutor engaged in purposeful discrimination.

Sufficiency

Regarding unlawful wounding, the evidence presented permitted the jury to find that Johnson, who was angry, bit and struck Washington when she confirmed that she did not love him and wanted to get out of the car. When Washington tried to exit the SUV, Johnson grabbed her arm and dragged her alongside the moving vehicle for about 25 feet, causing road abrasions to her feet and knees. Once he stopped, he tackled her and tried to force her back into the SUV, biting her on the hip in the process. He then dropped her on a grassy area beside the road, as eyewitnesses came to help her.

Photographs introduced at trial showed that Washington suffered bruising on her arm, road abrasions on her feet and knees, and bleeding on her forehead and hip where Johnson bit her. The jury could reasonably conclude that the evidence of Johnson’s actions showed his intent to maim, disable, disfigure or kill Washington when she tried to escape from his vehicle.

Turning to abduction, Johnson refused to stop at Washington’s house at the end of the evening because he decided that they “weren’t done talking.” Johnson agreed that he did not stop at Washington’s house because her brother was there and he was “trying to get [himself] back together.” He detained her in the SUV as he transported her away from her house and into a rural area despite her repeated pleas to stop and either take her home or let her out of the vehicle. Johnson forcibly grabbed Washington’s arm when she tried to escape the SUV and dragged her about 25 feet.

The eyewitnesses saw him stop the SUV in the middle of the road, tackle Washington as she tried to escape, and then try to force her back into the SUV. From these circumstances, the jury reasonably could conclude that Johnson detained and transported Washington against her will with the intent to deprive her of her personal liberty. Although Johnson disputed the Commonwealth’s evidence and steadfastly claimed he saved Washington’s life by stopping her from jumping from the moving SUV, the jury was “entitled to disbelieve the self-serving testimony of the accused.”

Finally, Johnson concedes that he failed to preserve his challenge to the eluding conviction for appeal. He asks this court to apply the ends of justice exception to Rule 5A:18 and consider the merits of his sufficiency argument. “The ‘ends of justice exception is narrow and is to be used sparingly,’ and applies only in the extraordinary situation where a miscarriage of justice has occurred.” Johnson has failed to establish that a manifest injustice has occurred.

Continuance

Johnson had discharged his court-appointed trial counsel in June following the March trial. At a status hearing on July 5, 2022, the trial court advised Johnson that he could hire a lawyer for sentencing, but noted that Johnson had “significant problems with the relationships” with his attorneys and counted five retained or court-appointed counsel who had moved to withdraw because of his “lack of cooperation and deteriorating relationship[s].”

The trial court granted Johnson’s motion for a continuance to hire an attorney but expressly warned him that there would be a sentencing hearing on Aug. 15, 2022. Johnson did not hire counsel. This court finds no error in the denial of the continuance.

Affirmed.

Johnson v. Commonwealth, Record No. 0270-25-2, July 21, 2026. CAV (unpublished opinion) (White). From the Circuit Court of Spotsylvania County (Rigual). Travis C. Gunn (McGuireWoods LLP, on briefs), for appellant. Shelly R. James, Senior Assistant Attorney General (Jason S. Miyares, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. VLW 026-7-304. 19 pp.

Full-Text Opinion