Home / Uncategorized (page 34)

Uncategorized

Feed Subscription

JEFFREY EUGENE NEEL v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s conviction of leaving the scene of an accident involving personal injury is reversed and the indictment is dismissed as the evidence failed to prove appellant knew or should have known personal injury had resulted from the collision at the time he fled the scene

Read More »

MAGRUDER v. COMMONWEALTH

For the reasons set forth in Brooks v. Commonwealth, trial court did not err in admitting the certificate of analysis without requiring the testimony of the person who performed the analysis; appellant?s conviction is affirmed

Read More »

NEEL v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s conviction of leaving the scene of an accident involving personal injury is reversed and the indictment is dismissed as the evidence failed to prove appellant knew or should have known personal injury had resulted from the collision at the time he fled the scene

Read More »

SHEILA MICHELLE STOKES v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court holds no variance exists between the language of the indictment and the evidence introduced at trial as to the victim; trial court did not err in admitting affidavits of forgery under the business records exception to the hearsay rule; evidence was sufficient to convict appellant of grand larceny

Read More »

SANDHIR v. AHUJA-SANDHIR

Summary affirmance ? trial court did not err in imputing income to appellant for purposes of determining spousal support and in denying appellant?s request for spousal support; remaining issue is barred by Rule 5A:18

Read More »

ARTHUR C. PARMANN v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the testimony as the witness testified within the scope of his training and expertise as an operator of the testing equipment; judgment affirmed

Read More »

CROZIER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress evidence obtained by police upon stopping his vehicle as the officer?s reasonable suspicion justified his stopping appellant for investigation

Read More »

STOKES v. COMMONWEALTH

This Court holds no variance exists between the language of the indictment and the evidence introduced at trial as to the victim; trial court did not err in admitting affidavits of forgery under the business records exception to the hearsay rule; evidence was sufficient to convict appellant of grand larceny

Read More »

DAVID PAUL COTE v. SUSAN REDFIELD COTE

Trial court did not err in finding husband responsible for $100,000 in debt incurred prior to the parties? final separation, in awarding husband only forty percent of wife?s retirement account, and in awarding wife spousal support

Read More »

WINSTON v. WARDEN (UNPUBLISHED ORDER)

Upon consideration of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, respondent's motion to dismiss the petition is granted. Petitioner's various claims alleging ineffective assistance of counsel are rejected as not satisfying the two-pronged test enunciated in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), and his remaining claims are rejected as lacking merit or as being either procedurally barred or improperly raised.

Read More »

WILLIAMS v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s convictions are affirmed as this Court holds that the informant?s tip provided the police with the requisite probable cause to arrest appellant and that the police did not need exigent circumstances in addition to probable cause for appellant?s arrest

Read More »

KENNETH WAYNE TURNER v. COMMONWEALTH

Circuit court erred in amending the warrant to charge driving under the influence, second or subsequent offense after appellant had been acquitted of that charge in a court of competent jurisdiction; judgment is reversed, appellant?s conviction for DUI second offense is set aside, and the case is remanded for resentencing on the conviction of driving under the influence, first offense

Read More »

WINKLER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the evidence sufficient to support appellant?s convictions of two counts of robbery and two counts of using a firearm in the commission of a felony

Read More »

WILLIAMS v. COMMONWEALTH (122760)

As appellant did not provide a sufficient proffer for this Court to determine whether the trial court erred in refusing to permit the cross-examination questions, appellant?s conviction of armed robbery is affirmed

Read More »

SMITH v. THORNTON-SMITH

Judgment pertaining to the rulings classifying the Arlington and Berryville properties and the award of attorney?s fees to appellee are affirmed; judgment pertaining to the classification of the Volkswagen is reversed and this matter is remanded to the trial court to reexamine the equitable distribution award

Read More »

SPROUSE v. ORANGE COUNTY

No error in trial court?s decision terminating appellant?s residual parental rights to his minor son pursuant to Code Section 16.1-283(C)(1) and 16.1-283(C)(2)

Read More »

DERRICK JAMES WILLIAMS v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s convictions are affirmed as this Court holds that the informant?s tip provided the police with the requisite probable cause to arrest appellant and that the police did not need exigent circumstances in addition to probable cause for appellant?s arrest

Read More »

REYES v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in refusing to admit the state of mind testimony and in refusing to admit testimony regarding appellant?s money and jewelry; appellant?s convictions for first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony are affirmed

Read More »

COLOCCIA v. COLOCCIA

Trial court?s refusal to set aside the property settlement agreement is affirmed as the evidence supports the trial court?s finding that husband failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he was incompetent when he executed the property settlement agreement

Read More »

ROLAND WILLIAMS, JR. v. COMMONWEALTH

As appellant did not provide a sufficient proffer for this Court to determine whether the trial court erred in refusing to permit the cross-examination questions, appellant?s conviction of armed robbery is affirmed

Read More »

LOWELL F. SMITH v. ALICE L. THORNTON-SMITH

Judgment pertaining to the rulings classifying the Arlington and Berryville properties and the award of attorney?s fees to appellee are affirmed; judgment pertaining to the classification of the Volkswagen is reversed and this matter is remanded to the trial court to reexamine the equitable distribution award

Read More »

JORGE LUIS REYES v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in refusing to admit the state of mind testimony and in refusing to admit testimony regarding appellant?s money and jewelry; appellant?s convictions for first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony are affirmed

Read More »

TURNER v. COMMONWEALTH

Circuit court erred in amending the warrant to charge driving under the influence, second or subsequent offense after appellant had been acquitted of that charge in a court of competent jurisdiction; judgment is reversed, appellant?s conviction for DUI second offense is set aside, and the case is remanded for resentencing on the conviction of driving under the influence, first offense

Read More »

RAYTHEON TECHNICAL SERVICES CO. v. HYLAND

In a defamation case, the judgment must be reversed because three of the five allegedly actionable statements are expressions of opinion, not fact, and therefore, should not have been submitted to the jury. Because the record does not reflect which statement or statements formed the basis of the jury verdict and the other grounds for reversal raised by the defendants are not dispositive in the posture of this case, the verdict is set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

SWITZER v. SWITZER

The Court of Appeals abused its discretion in summarily dismissing divorce and custody appeals brought of right by an indigent pro se litigant based on its prior order barring him from filing future appeals until he paid a $500 judgment entered against him pursuant to Code § 8.01-271.1 as a sanction for filing a frivolous appeal in another custody case involving his son. The order was not narrowly tailored to correct the problem of frivolous filings, and summary dismissal was an unduly severe sanction depriving him of the statutory right to consideration of the appeals. The judgments are reversed and the cases are remanded.

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. EPPS

Criminal contempt victimizes the court as an institution, as opposed to individual members thereof. Thus, in the appeal of the conviction of a city sheriff for criminal contempt and an order finding him in civil contempt, the Court of Appeals did not err in holding that a circuit court judge was not a "victim" of contempt of court as contemplated by Code § 19.2-271 and that she was therefore incompetent to testify in the contempt trial. The Court of Appeals' judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

CARPITCHER v. COMMONWEALTH

The Court of Appeals? dismissal of a petition for a writ of actual innocence based on non-biological evidence, in which a petitioner sought relief based on recantation evidence provided by the victim of the crimes who had given contrary testimony at petitioner?s original trial, correctly applied the statutory provisions governing such petitions, Code §§ 19.2-327.10 through -327.14. There was no abuse of discretion by the Court of Appeals in evaluating the evidence presented, and the judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

BELTON v. CRUDUP

In rejecting a petition to establish a parent-child relationship with a decedent whose estate is pending, the circuit court did not err in applying the requirements set forth in Code § 64.1-5.1(4) for a child born out of wedlock to share in the distribution of a putative parent?s estate. The sole act of filing a list of heirs identifying petitioner as decedent?s child did not toll the period during which an action seeking adjudication of the existence of the parent-child relationship was required to have been filed, and the petitioner cannot, as a matter of law, share in the settlement of the estate because no such action was commenced within one year of the decedent's death. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

W. R. HALL v. HAMPTON ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT

Contractual indemnification provisions are not void as against public policy insofar as they entitle an indemnitee to be reimbursed by an indemnitor for costs and expenses incurred in the defense of a personal injury claim by a third party. Accordingly, the trial court correctly ruled that the indemnity provisions in a construction contract were enforceable. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Read More »
Scroll To Top