Watwood v. Edmunds, No. 3:2022cv00381 - Document 38 (E.D. Va. 2024)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for details. Signed by Senior United States District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr. on 3/7/2024. (sbea)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Watwood v. Edmunds Doc. 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division JAMES DAVID WATWOOD, Petitioner, Civil Action No. 3:22CV381 V. LARRY T. EDMUNDS, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION James David Watwood, a Virginia state prisoner proceeding prose, brings this petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 challenging his convictions in the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County of two counts of indecent liberties, six counts of sodomy, and six counts of object sexual penetration. In order to provide context for Watwood's claims, it is appropriate to summarize the evidence of his guilt. 1 I. Summary of the Evidence On appeal, the Virginia Court of Appeals rejected Watwood's contention that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. In doing so, the Court of Appeals aptly summarized the relevant evidence as follows: Appellant is the ex-husband of the victim's mother. At the time of the offenses, appellant and the victim's mother were married and the family resided together in Chesterfield County from August 2013 to January of 2014. The victim was twelve years old at the time of trial. The victim testified that, when he was nine years old, on six different occasions, appellant came into his bedroom at night when the rest of his family was sleeping. The victim stated that, during the first incident, he was asleep in his bed, and appellant shook him to awaken him. Appellant, wearing only a robe, asked the victim to "put [his] mouth on [appellant's] private area," saying, "Come suck on this for me." The victim testified that a private part is a penis. The victim stated that, during the act, appellant 1 The Court employs the pagination assigned by the CM/ECF docketing system. The Court corrects the spelling, capitalization, and footnote numbers in the quotations in the record. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
