Hamm v. Commonwealth

Opinion

COLEMAN, J.

Royce Leon Hamm was convicted by a jury of maliciously burning an automobile in violation of Code § 18.2-81 and of conspiring to maliciously bum the vehicle. Hamm contends: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions because the Commonwealth failed to prove malice; (2) the prosecutor violated his due process rights by failing to characterize as exculpatory a laboratory report furnished to the defense in discovery; (3) the judge erred by admitting hearsay testimony of the insurance company’s investigator; (4) the Commonwealth failed to prove ownership of the…