Home / Uncategorized (page 29)

Uncategorized

Feed Subscription

DARIUS T. HICKS v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err by denying appellant?s motion to suppress his statements to the police, admitting evidence of prior bad acts, and admitting photographs of the deceased victim and her fetus; judgment affirmed

Read More »

RAAB v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress; appellant?s conviction for driving under the influence, third or subsequent offense, is affirmed

Read More »

ROBERT LESLIE SLAYTON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence sufficient to support appellant?s convictions for one count of statutory burglary, one count of aggravated malicious wounding, two counts of malicious wounding, and one count of assault and battery

Read More »

TBC CORPORATION v. STEPHENS

Commission?s award of medical benefits to claimant is reversed as the record fails to support the commission?s finding that the claimant proved his injury resulted from an actual risk arising out of his employment

Read More »

KERNS v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not commit reversible error as the trial court had authority under the juvenile statutes to commit appellant to the Department of Juvenile Justice for violating the terms of his probation

Read More »

HICKS v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err by denying appellant?s motion to suppress his statements to the police, admitting evidence of prior bad acts, and admitting photographs of the deceased victim and her fetus; judgment affirmed

Read More »

SLAYTON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence sufficient to support appellant?s convictions for one count of statutory burglary, one count of aggravated malicious wounding, two counts of malicious wounding, and one count of assault and battery

Read More »

CHRISTOPHER L. LUCIANO v. CITY OF HAMPTON DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

Trial court did not err in terminating appellant?s residual parental rights to his son as the department of social services presented clear and convincing evidence satisfying the statutory requirements of Code Section 16.1-283(C)(2) and establishing that termination of appellant?s residual parental rights was in the child?s best interests

Read More »

LUCIANO v. CITY OF HAMPTON

Trial court did not err in terminating appellant?s residual parental rights to his son as the department of social services presented clear and convincing evidence satisfying the statutory requirements of Code Section 16.1-283(C)(2) and establishing that termination of appellant?s residual parental rights was in the child?s best interests

Read More »

CUNNINGHAM v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial judge erred in denying the motion to suppress the evidence found in appellant?s house pursuant to the search warrant as the search warrant was not supported by probable cause; appellant?s conviction for possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court

Read More »

RIDLEY v. CHESAPEAKE

As this case does not satisfy the ends of justice exception to Rule 5A:18, trial court?s decision terminating appellant?s residual parental rights to his minor son is affirmed

Read More »

YAP v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court finds that the trial court did not err in not remanding this case to the district court for resolution and that the trial court did not interpret Code Sections 18.2-266 and 18.2-269 as rebuttable presumptions; appellant?s conviction is affirmed

Read More »

VICTOR GARNETTE CUNNINGHAM v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial judge erred in denying the motion to suppress the evidence found in appellant?s house pursuant to the search warrant as the search warrant was not supported by probable cause; appellant?s conviction for possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court

Read More »

SOWERS v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying the pre-trial motion to suppress evidence pursuant to a search warrant and in applying the good faith exception of United States v. Leon; appellant?s conviction of possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute is affirmed

Read More »

EDWARD YAP v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court finds that the trial court did not err in not remanding this case to the district court for resolution and that the trial court did not interpret Code Sections 18.2-266 and 18.2-269 as rebuttable presumptions; appellant?s conviction is affirmed

Read More »

CHARITY v. COMMONWEALTH

As sufficient evidence exists to find appellant guilty of the charge of conspiracy to commit escape from prison, appellant?s conviction of conspiracy is affirmed

Read More »

JOHN EUGENE SOWERS, JR. v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying the pre-trial motion to suppress evidence pursuant to a search warrant and in applying the good faith exception of United States v. Leon; appellant?s conviction of possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute is affirmed

Read More »

REILLY v. SHEPHERD

In a malicious prosecution action against a police officer who investigated an armed robbery, and caused plaintiff to be arrested, the circuit court erred in denying the defendant?s motion to strike the plaintiff?s evidence. While the victim was ultimately unable to identify plaintiff as the perpetrator of the crime, and the case was dismissed by nolle prosequi, the evidence was insufficient, as a matter of law, to warrant submission of the issue of the lack of probable cause to the jury. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed and final judgment is entered in favor of the defendant.

Read More »

PETROSINELLI v. PETA

In protracted civil litigation, the trial court abused its discretion in adjudging a foreign attorney to be in civil contempt under Code § 18.2-456 and imposing monetary sanctions against him based on his issuance of a subpoena to an out-of-state witness in alleged violation of prior court discovery orders. The orders contained no language specifically prohibiting issuance of the subject subpoena; thus its issuance could not be an act of contempt as a matter of law. The judgment of the trial court is reversed, the sanctions award based thereon is vacated, and final judgment is entered in the foreign attorney's favor.

Read More »

ISBELL v. COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT ASSOCIATES

The circuit court correctly dismissed a tenant's personal injury suit against a landlord for failure to maintain the premises in a safe condition. The comprehensive scheme of landlord and tenant contractual rights and remedies in the Residential Landlord and Tenant Act does not create a statutory personal injury cause of action for a tenant since the General Assembly did not plainly manifest an intention therein to abrogate the common law rule that a landlord is not liable in tort for a tenant?s personal injuries caused by the landlord?s failure to repair premises under the tenant?s control and possession. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Read More »

MARTIN v. HOWARD

A trial court's order of exhumation rendered pursuant to Code § 32.1-286(C) in order to facilitate DNA testing by a woman claiming to be the daughter of the decedent was not in error. The General Assembly expressly provided that the need of a qualified illegitimate child to prove parentage for the purpose of inheritance is sufficient cause for exhumation. The order is affirmed and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. MILLER

In a proceeding under the Sexually Violent Predators Act, Code §§ 37.2-900 et seq., the circuit court erred in permitting testimony from a particular expert witness for the prisoner, who was qualified in the diagnosis and assessment of sex offenders, but was not shown to be skilled in the treatment of such individuals, as plainly required by the Act. The court further erred in concluding that the Commonwealth failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is a sexually violent predator as defined by the Act. The judgment is reversed, final judgment is entered in favor of the Commonwealth, and the case is remanded for further proceedings under the Act.

Read More »

TELEGUZ v. COMMONWEALTH

In an appeal from defendant's conviction for capital murder for hire, and imposition of the death sentence, after review of numerous assignments of error and completion of the statutorily-mandated review of the imposition of the death penalty, no error is found, and no grounds for setting aside or commuting the sentence of death. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Read More »

ALEXANDRIA CITY COUNCIL v. MIRANT POTOMAC RIVER

The circuit court did not err in declaring an amendment to a city's zoning ordinance invalid and reinstating two auxiliary special use permits issued to a power company that operates a coal-burning electricity generating plant. The amendment violated Code § 15.2-2307 because it impaired an established vested right to operate the plant, and the revocation of the two auxiliary special use permits pursuant to the amendment was unlawful. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Read More »

WASHINGTON v. COMMONWEALTH

Defendant's conviction for obstruction of justice in violation of Code § 18.2-460(C) is reversed because the Commonwealth failed to prove that, at the time of the defendant's acts, the law enforcement officer to whom the acts were directed was discharging duties related to a violation of or conspiracy to violate one of the various felony offenses listed in the statute. The judgment of the Court of Appeals of Virginia is reversed and the indictment is dismissed.

Read More »

BALDWIN v. MCCONNELL

In an assault and battery case, the trial court abused its discretion in ordering remittitur of a jury award of compensatory and punitive damages when, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the jury's award of compensatory damages was not excessive as a matter of law, and an independent review of the $100,000 punitive damages award shows that it is not shocking to the conscience or otherwise inappropriate in light of defendant's egregious conduct, and hence was not excessive as a matter of law. The judgment is reversed and final judgment is entered for plaintiff.

Read More »

JOHN C. HOLLAND ENTERPRISES v. SOUTHEASTERN PUB. SERVICE AUTH.

The trial court did not err in determining that Code § 15.2-5121(A) did not apply to a refuse collection and disposal authority created by a group of municipalities under the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act so as to require the constituent municipalities to make the findings mandated therein before the authority could begin disposing of a new type of refuse at its established landfill. Code § 15.2-5121(A) applies only to the initial decision to operate a "system" of refuse collection as defined under the Act and the service of handling a new type of refuse does not constitute the operation of a "system." The trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

APAC-ATLANTIC, INC. v. GENERAL INSURANCE CO.

Under the Virginia Public Procurement Act, actions on payment bonds relating to general construction projects under contracts awarded by the Virginia Department of Transportation must be brought within the one-year limitations period contained in Code § 2.2-4341(C). Accordingly, where a plaintiff subcontractor finished work on certain roadway improvement projects more than one year before filing the present litigation, the circuit court did not err in granting the defendant surety company's motion for summary judgment and entering judgment in its favor. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Read More »

BUDD v. PUNYANITYA

In a medical malpractice case, the trial court correctly applied Code § 8.01-401.1 to bar a party from introducing certain statements contained in published medical literature because the statements had not been provided to the opposing party 30 days prior to trial. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »
Scroll To Top