COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Frank
RANDALL ALLAN MARTIN
MEMORANDUM OPINION *
v. Record No. 0129-99-4 PER CURIAM
NOVEMBER 16, 1999
SUSAN ANN MARTIN
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY
Richard B. Potter, Judge
(T. James Binder; Tate & Bywater, Ltd., on
brief), for appellant.
(Linda M. Boykin; Legal Services of Northern
Virginia, Inc., on brief), for appellee.
Randall Martin (Martin) appeals the decision of the circuit
court finding that Martin owed $33,015.05 in outstanding pendente
lite child and spousal support. Martin contends that the amount
of the arrearage is erroneous, based upon the trial court's
previous finding in an order dated August 14, 1998, that he owed
$23,672.99 in back child and spousal support. Upon reviewing the
record and the briefs of the parties, we conclude that this appeal
is without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision
of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27.
The evidence on child and spousal support was heard by the
trial court.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code
§ 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.
Under familiar principles we view [the]
evidence and all reasonable inferences in
the light most favorable to the prevailing
party below. Where, as here, the court
hears the evidence ore tenus, its finding is
entitled to great weight and will not be
disturbed on appeal unless plainly wrong or
without evidence to support it.
Martin v. Pittsylvania County Dep't of Social Servs., 3 Va. App.
15, 20, 348 S.E.2d 13, 16 (1986). The record on appeal contains
neither a transcript of the hearing before the trial court nor a
written statement of facts. The trial court made specific
findings of fact in the final decree from which Martin appeals.
"An appellate court must dispose of the case upon the record and
cannot base its decision upon appellant's petition or brief, or
statements of counsel in open court. We may act only upon facts
contained in the record." Smith v. Commonwealth, 16 Va. App.
630, 635, 432 S.E.2d 2, 6 (1993).
[O]n appeal the judgment of the lower court
is presumed to be correct and the burden is
on the appellant to present to us a
sufficient record from which we can
determine whether the lower court has erred
in the respect complained of.
Justis v. Young, 202 Va. 631, 632, 119 S.E.2d 255, 256-57
(1961). The factual findings in the decree provide a sufficient
record for us to determine the merits of Martin's appeal.
In the final decree, the trial court found that, as of
November 25, 1998, the child support arrearage was $25,634.00 and
the spousal support arrearage was $7,381.05. The trial court
reduced child support from $1,300 per month to $502, effective
- 2 -
September 1, 1998, but increased spousal support from $300 per
month, formerly subject to a $170 per month credit, to $340 per
month until Martin paid the balance of $2,342.78 due on a vehicle
awarded to his former wife. Although the trial court did not set
out in detail its calculation of the support arrearages, there is
evidence in the record supporting the trial court's findings,
including its retroactive modification of support.
In this appeal, Martin failed to direct us with specificity
to evidence in the record supporting his alternative calculation
of the amount due. His assertion that no more than $3,306 in
support was due following the trial court's calculation of the
arrearage in the August 14, 1998 contempt order through November
1998 is not supported by the record. Martin also failed to
consider interest due on the arrearage. Martin's bare recitation
of error, without any reference to evidence produced in the
record, is insufficient. "Statements unsupported by argument,
authority, or citations to the record do not merit appellate
consideration. We will not search the record for errors in
order to interpret appellant's contention and correct
deficiencies in a brief." Buchanan v. Buchanan, 14 Va. App. 53,
56, 415 S.E.2d 237, 239 (1992).
Accordingly, the decision of the circuit court is summarily
affirmed.
Affirmed.
- 3 -