The Virginia Supreme Court convened on January 1, 2025, to deliberate on the case of Cappe v. Commonwealth, focusing on significant procedural and evidentiary issues raised during the trial. Central to the discussions was the trial court's alleged misapplication of the Bowman case, which pertains to the admissibility of lay opinion testimony in court.

Counsel for the defendant argued that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding testimony from a key witness, Miss Kuykendall, which they claimed was crucial for the jury's analysis of video evidence. The defense contended that the trial court incorrectly interpreted the Bowman ruling, asserting that it should apply to non-identification testimony as well. This argument was met with skepticism from the Commonwealth's representative, who highlighted procedural deficiencies in the defense's brief, suggesting that the arguments presented were not adequately developed.

The court examined whether the appellate court's ruling on harmless error was justified, noting that the appellate court had provided an extensive analysis of the issue, which the defense argued was unnecessary for the final ruling. The justices discussed the implications of labeling parts of the appellate court's opinion as "dicta," which could affect future cases and the precedential value of the ruling.

The Commonwealth's counsel acknowledged that the procedural rules had not been fully adhered to in the defense's arguments, which could lead to a dismissal of the second assignment of error. The court considered the possibility of vacating the appellate court's opinion entirely, thereby nullifying the broader implications of the ruling on lay witness identification.

In conclusion, the Virginia Supreme Court's deliberations highlighted critical issues regarding the interpretation of evidentiary rules and procedural compliance, with potential ramifications for future cases involving lay witness testimony. The court's decision on how to proceed with the appeal will be pivotal in clarifying these legal standards.