Don't Miss
Home / 2006 / May

Monthly Archives: May 2006

ERNEST DEWITT FORD, JR. v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in restricting argument regarding punishment during the guilt phase of the trial; sufficient evidence supports appellant?s convictions of animal cruelty and possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. JAYANT KADIAN

Trial court erred in granting appellee?s motion to suppress statements he made to police; trial court?s ruling is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court

Read More »

LEROY STEVENSON, JR. v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court finds appellant waived his Miranda objection to the admissibility of his post-arrest statements; evidence was sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute

Read More »

VERNON ANTONIO WILSON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress as the post-indictment taking of a DNA sample without notifying counsel did not violate appellant?s Sixth Amendment right to counsel; evidence was sufficient to establish breaking and entering; no error in trial court?s finding the Commonwealth did not violate the pre-trial discovery order; appellant?s convictions are affirmed

Read More »

DEMETRUS D. BALDWIN, S/K/A DEMETRIUS BALDWIN v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence was sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of attempted murder; as the sentence imposed upon appellant for his conviction of attempted murder under Code Sections 18.2-26 and 18.2-32 exceeds the statutory maximum for a Class 4 felony, appellant?s sentence is vacated and this case is remanded to the trial court for resentencing

Read More »

FORD v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in restricting argument regarding punishment during the guilt phase of the trial; sufficient evidence supports appellant?s convictions of animal cruelty and possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. KADIAN

Trial court erred in granting appellee?s motion to suppress statements he made to police; trial court?s ruling is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court

Read More »

DOLLAR TREE DISTRIBUTION v. DURR

Summary affirmance ? no error in commission?s finding that appellee?s failure to disconnect trailer brake air lines before pulling away in the tractor he was operating did not constitute willful misconduct; award is affirmed

Read More »

ROBERTS v. ROBERTS

Trial court?s order denying wife?s request for a reservation of spousal support and affirming the court?s classification and distribution of the disputed items of property is affirmed

Read More »

STEVENSON v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court finds appellant waived his Miranda objection to the admissibility of his post-arrest statements; evidence was sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute

Read More »

WILSON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress as the post-indictment taking of a DNA sample without notifying counsel did not violate appellant?s Sixth Amendment right to counsel; evidence was sufficient to establish breaking and entering; no error in trial court?s finding the Commonwealth did not violate the pre-trial discovery order; appellant?s convictions are affirmed

Read More »

THOMPSON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to dismiss based upon a statutory speedy trial violation; appellant?s conviction of inflicting bodily injury is affirmed

Read More »

HENDERSON v. COMMONWEALTH

No error in trial court?s denial of appellant?s motion to suppress his letter of apology as the letter was not obtained by the police through a procedure that violated the appellant?s constitutional rights; appellant?s convictions affirmed

Read More »

MCCOLLUM v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence was sufficient to prove appellant exercised dominion and control over the cocaine; appellant?s conviction is affirmed

Read More »

BALDWIN v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence was sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of attempted murder; as the sentence imposed upon appellant for his conviction of attempted murder under Code Sections 18.2-26 and 18.2-32 exceeds the statutory maximum for a Class 4 felony, appellant?s sentence is vacated and this case is remanded to the trial court for resentencing

Read More »

MASON v. FINNEY

Summary affirmance ? no error in commission?s finding that employer failed to sustain its burden of proving that claimant?s claim for benefits was barred by willful misconduct; award is affirmed

Read More »

INTERSTATE BRANDS CORP. v. KINCHEN

Summary affirmance ? commission did not err in finding that claimant proved his medical treatment and disability were causally related to his compensable injury by accident; award is affirmed

Read More »

DENNIS GILLIKIN v. MICHELE BURCHETT

Judgment of the trial court reversed as the trial court did not comply with the requirements of Code Section 20-124.3 by failing to communicate to the parties the basis of its decision; case is remanded to the trial court for compliance with the statute

Read More »

STEVEN J. VANWORMER v. PAMELA A. VANWORMER

Trial judge did not err in his classifications of the Colorado house and the down payment on the marital home; trial judge abused his discretion in the classification of the marital home by including the post-separation mortgage payments in the determination of separate contributions to the home; matter is remanded to the trial court

Read More »

MEDINSIGHTS v. KISNER

No error in commission?s conclusion that appellee?s claim for permanent partial disability was not barred by the statute of limitations set forth in Code Section 65.2-708(B)

Read More »

GILLIKIN v. BURCHETT

Judgment of the trial court reversed as the trial court did not comply with the requirements of Code Section 20-124.3 by failing to communicate to the parties the basis of its decision; case is remanded to the trial court for compliance with the statute

Read More »
Scroll To Top