## Facts

- Police executed a drug-search warrant at Angela Marie Carosi’s Stafford County home, where she lived with her three children (ages 10, 5, and 3).
- In the master bedroom, officers found an unlocked wardrobe containing marijuana, drug paraphernalia, a digital scale, and plastic bags.
- Inside the wardrobe was an unlocked safe containing prescription bottles with oxycodone and MDMA; a plate with razor blades and powdered cocaine sat on top of the safe.
- The bedroom door had no lock, and the drugs in the wardrobe were within reach of a small child.
- An officer testified Carosi acknowledged smoking devices in the wardrobe, kept clothing there, and said the safe belonged to her and the children’s father; Carosi denied knowledge of drugs in the safe.
- The children’s father testified the wardrobe and drugs were his and that Carosi did not know they were present.
- A jury acquitted Carosi of felony child abuse and drug-possession charges but convicted her of three counts of felony child endangerment under Va. Code § 40.1-103(A).

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove Carosi, as a custodial parent, willfully or negligently caused or permitted her children’s lives to be endangered under Va. Code § 40.1-103(A) by allowing illegal drugs to be kept accessible in the home.
2. Whether acquittal on related drug-possession counts precluded a finding of the knowledge or criminal negligence necessary to support child-endangerment convictions.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the convictions.
- Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the Court held the jury could credit the officer’s testimony and infer Carosi knew or should have known the drugs were present and accessible.
- The Court held the jury’s acquittal on possession charges did not control the child-endangerment analysis; inconsistent verdicts are permissible and each count stands on its own evidentiary footing.
- The Court concluded the unsecured presence of multiple controlled substances and paraphernalia, reachable by young children, created a real endangerment from which criminal negligence could be found.

## Legal Principles

- On sufficiency review, the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, with all reasonable inferences drawn in its favor.
- Va. Code § 40.1-103(A) is violated when a custodian willfully or negligently causes or permits a child’s life to be endangered; criminal negligence may be inferred from circumstances showing a defendant knew or should have known of a serious risk to a child.
- A factfinder may accept or reject portions of testimony and infer knowledge and negligence from physical circumstances (e.g., unsecured contraband accessible to children).
- Acquittal on related offenses does not bar conviction on child endangerment arising from the same events; inconsistent verdicts do not invalidate supported convictions.
- The statute is not triggered by generalized “drug environment” exposure alone; the inquiry is fact-specific and turns on whether the manner and conditions of keeping contraband actually endangered the child’s life.

## Conclusion

The court upheld three child-endangerment convictions because the evidence permitted a finding that Carosi at least negligently allowed unsecured illegal drugs and paraphernalia to remain accessible to her young children, and her acquittal on possession charges did not preclude liability under the separate endangerment statute.


Carosi v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 545, 701 S.E.2d 441 (Va. 2010)