Don't Miss
Home / 2005 / October

Monthly Archives: October 2005

HALE v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress statements he made to police as appellant did not manifest an unequivocal invocation of his right to remain silent

Read More »

SOSA v. SIGNATURE SERIES CONSTRUCTION, INC., et al.

Summary affirmance ? commission did not err in finding that appellant failed to prove he sustained an injury by accident arising out of his employment and in allowing a witness to testify at the hearing when she was not identified in pre-hearing discovery

Read More »

WALKER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence sufficient to sustain appellant's convictions for marital rape and attempted marital sexual assault

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. JACKSON

Trial court did not err in suppressing the evidence as the encounter between appellee and the police was not consensual and constituted an illegal seizure

Read More »

RICHARD JENNINGS CABANISS v. NANCY TURNER CABANISS

Trial court did not err in finding the allegations in wife?s bill of complaint a sufficient factual basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over husband pursuant to Virginia?s long-arm statute, and overruling husband?s jurisdictional objection to those allegations

Read More »

ANTONIO NOAH LASSITER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in convicting appellant of statutory burglary as the evidence proved that the landlord took possession of the property without effecting a breach of the peace and pursuant to a court order giving him possession

Read More »

LARRY ALONZO OLIVER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err by admitting, during the sentencing phase of appellant?s bifurcated jury trial, evidence of prior criminal convictions appellant received from special military courts-martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice

Read More »

MARK ANTONIO WALLACE v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding that appellant?s statutory right to a speedy trial was not violated as appellant?s trial commenced within the five-month period required by statute; appellant?s convictions affirmed

Read More »

DAMIEN JAMES JARVIS v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court declines to address appellant?s argument that the evidence is insufficient to prove that he possessed tools with larcenous intent as appellant has not properly preserved his argument for appeal

Read More »

WASTE MANAGEMENT INC. AND GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC. v. ARTHUR W. COLES

Summary affirmance ? no error in commission?s finding that claimant proved that his left elbow surgery was causally related to his compensable injury by accident, employer failed to prove claimant was terminated for cause, and claimant proved he remained partially disabled after leaving his job with employer and that he made reasonable efforts to market his residual work capacity thereafter

Read More »

CABANISS v. CABANISS

Trial court did not err in finding the allegations in wife?s bill of complaint a sufficient factual basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over husband pursuant to Virginia?s long-arm statute, and overruling husband?s jurisdictional objection to those allegations

Read More »

LASSITER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in convicting appellant of statutory burglary as the evidence proved that the landlord took possession of the property without effecting a breach of the peace and pursuant to a court order giving him possession

Read More »

OLIVER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err by admitting, during the sentencing phase of appellant?s bifurcated jury trial, evidence of prior criminal convictions appellant received from special military courts-martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice

Read More »

WALLACE v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding that appellant?s statutory right to a speedy trial was not violated as appellant?s trial commenced within the five-month period required by statute; appellant?s convictions affirmed

Read More »

JARVIS v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court declines to address appellant?s argument that the evidence is insufficient to prove that he possessed tools with larcenous intent as appellant has not properly preserved his argument for appeal

Read More »
Scroll To Top