From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Breeding v. Commonwealth

Supreme Court of Virginia
Nov 27, 1972
192 S.E.2d 807 (Va. 1972)

Summary

In Breeding v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 344, 192 S.E.2d 807 (1992) (per curiam), we held that the accused did not act with lascivious intent when he drove to an area where two girls were playing and asked them for directions. He was seated in the car with his trousers unbuckled and unzipped.

Summary of this case from Viney v. Commonwealth

Opinion

42794 Record No. 8041.

November 27, 1972

Present, Snead, C.J., Carrico, Harrison, Cochran, Harman and Poff, JJ.

Criminal Law — Lascivious Intent — Failure of Proof.

Since evidence of Commonwealth is insufficient to prove lascivious intent required under statute, conviction cannot be upheld.

Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of the City of Chesapeake. Hon. Major M. Hillard, judge presiding.

Reversed and remanded.

James M. Pickrell; Albert L. Fary, Jr. (Kellam, Pickrell and Lawler, on brief), for plaintiff in error.

Gilbert W. Haith, Assistant Attorney General (Andrew P. Miller, Attorney General, on brief), for defendant in error.


Defendant, John Purnell Breeding, was charged in two indictments with exposing his genital parts "with lascivious intent" to two children under the age of fourteen years, in violation of Sec. 18.1-214, Code of 1950, as amended. He was tried by the court without a jury and sentenced to three years in the State Penitentiary on each indictment, with the sentences to run concurrently. We granted writs of error to the judgments.

The evidence shows that on the afternoon of June 24, 1970, two girls, 8 and 10 years old, respectively, were playing on Arbutus Circle in the City of Chesapeake. A car driven by the defendant stopped and he asked them the way to Daniel's Pharmacy. When the girls approached the car they noticed that defendant's trousers were unbuckled and unzipped, and they saw what they referred to as his "privacy." The defendant made no suggestive remarks or gestures and there was no evidence that he was sexually aroused. After obtaining the information sought, defendant went on his way.

The evidence of the Commonwealth is insufficient to prove the lascivious intent required under the statute, and the convictions cannot be upheld. McKeon v. Commonwealth, 211 Va. 24, 26-27, 175 S.E.2d 282, 284 (1970).

The judgments are reversed and set aside and the cases are remanded to the court below for a new trial if the Commonwealth be so advised.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Breeding v. Commonwealth

Supreme Court of Virginia
Nov 27, 1972
192 S.E.2d 807 (Va. 1972)

In Breeding v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 344, 192 S.E.2d 807 (1992) (per curiam), we held that the accused did not act with lascivious intent when he drove to an area where two girls were playing and asked them for directions. He was seated in the car with his trousers unbuckled and unzipped.

Summary of this case from Viney v. Commonwealth

In Breeding, the defendant stopped his car, in which he sat with his trousers unbuckled and unzipped, and when he asked two young girls for directions, "they saw what they referred to as his `privacy.'"

Summary of this case from Simon v. Com

In Breeding v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 344, 192 S.E.2d 807 (1972) (per curiam), the Supreme Court also found no lascivious intent.

Summary of this case from Viney v. Commonwealth
Case details for

Breeding v. Commonwealth

Case Details

Full title:JOHN PURNELL BREEDING v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

Court:Supreme Court of Virginia

Date published: Nov 27, 1972

Citations

192 S.E.2d 807 (Va. 1972)
192 S.E.2d 807

Citing Cases

Viney v. Commonwealth

Id. at 27, 175 S.E.2d at 284. In Breeding v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 344, 192 S.E.2d 807 (1972) ( per curiam),…

Viney v. Commonwealth

Having directed their attention to his groin, he then moved his shorts aside and exposed his penis. In…