Jasper Harris, Jr. v. Virginia Employment Commission et al.

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: 	Judges Elder, Clements and Senior Judge Annunziata
JASPER HARRIS, JR.
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. 	Record No. 0365-08-2 	PER CURIAM
SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
VIRGINIA EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION AND
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, ex rel.
VIRGINIA INDUSTRIES FOR THE BLIND
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND
Margaret P. Spencer, Judge
(Jasper Harris, Jr., pro se, on brief).
(Robert F. McDonnell, Attorney General; Elizabeth B. Peay,
Assistant Attorney General; Thomas W. Nesbitt, Assistant Attorney
General, on brief), for appellee Virginia Employment Commission.
No brief for appellee Commonwealth of Virginia, ex rel. Virginia
Industries for the Blind.
Jasper Harris, Jr. appeals a decision of the circuit court affirming the Virginia Employment
Commission’s (VEC) decision finding that Harris is disqualified from receiving unemployment
compensation benefits effective June 5, 2005, pursuant to Code § 60.2-618(2), because his
employer, Virginia Industries for the Blind, discharged him for misconduct connected with his
work. We have reviewed the record, the opinions of the appeals examiner and the VEC, and the
circuit court’s February 20, 2008 final order, and find that this appeal is without merit.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated in the appeals examiner’s opinion, as adopted by
the VEC, along with its additional findings, in its opinion, and as affirmed by the circuit court in
its final order dismissing Harris’s petition for judicial review of the VEC’s decision. See Harris
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.

- 2 -
v. Commonwealth, Commission Decision UI-0510629 (Aug. 18, 2005); Harris v.
Commonwealth, Commission Decision 76627-C (June 21, 2006); Harris v. Virginia
Employment Comm’n, Case No. 706CL060004750-00 (Feb. 20, 2008). We dispense with oral
argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code
§ 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27.1
Affirmed.
1 In light of our summary affirmance of the circuit court’s decision, we deny the VEC’s
motion to dismiss.