Custalow v. Commonwealth

Argued at Richmond, Virginia OPINION Charles Bernard Custalow appeals his conviction for trespassing in violation of Code § 18.2-119. Appellant contends that the Mattaponi Indian Tribe improperly barred him from its reservation. Thus, the Commonwealth failed to prove appellant was forbidden to ""go[] upon or remain upon"" the reservation by the ""person lawfully in charge thereof."" See Code § 18.2-119. For the reasons that follow, we affirm his conviction. I. Background On appeal, we review the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth as the party prevailing below. Juares v. Commonwealth, 26 Va. App. 154, 156, 493 S.E.2d 677, 678 (1997). That principle requires us to discard the evidence of the defendant in conflict with the Commonwealth's evidence and regard as true all evidence favorable to the Commonwealth. See Watkins v. Commonwealth, 26 Va. App. 335, 348, 494 S.E.2d 859, 866 (1998).1 So viewed, the record shows that appellant trespassed upon the Mattaponi Indian Reservation on February 23, 2002 after having been forbidden to do so.2