The Virginia Court of Appeals has upheld a conviction in a contentious case involving a man accused of possessing a firearm after being convicted of a violent felony. The court, presided over by Chief Judge Marla Graff Decker, issued its opinion on November 25, 2025, in the case against the Commonwealth of Virginia. The appellant, Thomas Wesley Hollingsworth, had argued that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when police conducted a second pat-down search that led to the discovery of the firearm.
Thomas Wesley Hollingsworth filed an appeal in the Court of Appeals of Virginia against the Commonwealth of Virginia on November 25, 2025. He challenged his conviction for possessing a firearm after being convicted of a violent felony, arguing that the evidence was obtained through an unlawful search. The case originated from an incident in November 2023 when Virginia Beach Police responded to reports of a potential armed robbery at a convenience store. Officers encountered Hollingsworth and another individual matching suspect descriptions provided by dispatch. During their investigation, officers conducted multiple searches which eventually led to finding a gun on Hollingsworth’s person.
According to court documents, Officer Shaun Brooks initially patted down Hollingsworth but did not find any weapons. Despite this initial search yielding no results, further investigation revealed new information from store clerks identifying Hollingsworth as having brandished a firearm with an extended magazine during the alleged robbery attempt. This prompted Officer Austin Chase to conduct another pat-down despite Hollingsworth’s refusal. The second search uncovered the weapon tucked into Hollingsworth’s waistband.
Hollingsworth’s defense contended that the second pat-down was unwarranted since no weapon was found during the first search and claimed it violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, the court found that new evidence provided reasonable suspicion justifying further action by law enforcement. Testimonies from Officers Brooks, Luu, and Chase highlighted concerns for public safety due to unresolved reports about an armed suspect at large.
The appellate court ruled that under these circumstances—where reliable eyewitness accounts indicated possession of a dangerous weapon—the second pat-down was reasonable and necessary for officer safety and public protection. Consequently, they affirmed Hollingsworth’s conviction based on this lawful seizure under established legal precedents allowing successive investigatory stops if supported by evolving facts or credible witness testimony.
In addition to affirming his five-year prison sentence without suspension (plus two additional years suspended), judges noted alternative grounds supporting their decision such as inevitable discovery doctrine which would have likely led authorities back towards discovering incriminating evidence regardless through lawful means like arrest warrants related DUI charges also pending against him at time arrest occurred.
Representing parties included Assistant Public Defender Amber Novoa Alvarez Torgerson for appellant while Assistant Attorney General J. Brady Hess represented appellee alongside Attorney General Jason S Miyares briefing matters before judicial panel comprising Chief Judge Decker alongside Judges Beales & Athey reviewing proceedings initiated Circuit Court City Virginia Beach overseen Judge Afshin Farashahi sentencing phase record No 1083-24-1 .
Source: 1083241_Hollingsworth_v_Commonwealth_of_Virginia_Opinion_Virginia_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
