Home / Uncategorized (page 39) /

Uncategorized

Feed Subscription

CONYERS v. MARTIAL ARTS WORLD

The judgment of the circuit court that a particular martial arts instruction program for children, which qualifies as a ?child day program? generally subject to licensure by the Virginia Department of Social Services, is exempt from licensure is reversed because of an erroneous interpretation of the ?come and go? exemption set forth in Code § 63.2-1715(A)(2). Because a determination is required whether the subject program actually complied with its written policy that children may enter and leave its premises without permission or supervision in order to determine whether the exemption from licensure under Code § 63.2-1715(A)(2) applies, the case is remanded.

Read More »

WARD v. COMMONWEALTH

The trial court did not err in refusing to grant defendant?s motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to an anticipatory search warrant issued for a physical address other than the address shown on a suspicious parcel found to contain illegal drugs. None of the circumstances recognized in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), for excluding application of the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule apply under the facts presented. The Court of Appeals' judgment approving the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

CLINE v. BERG

In a suit for an injunction requiring removal of a 32-foot high, 200-foot long fence constructed of utility poles and plastic wrap which allegedly interfered unreasonably with plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his real property, the circuit court abused its discretion in granting injunctive relief to the plaintiff because it failed to apply the "clean hands" doctrine. For that reason, the circuit court?s judgment is reversed and final judgment is entered for the defendants.

Read More »

KUZNICKI v. MASON

In a suit by condominium unit owners involving a limited common element, under Code §§ 55-79.53(A) and -79.80(B) only a condominium unit owners? association has standing to sue for claims related to common elements and limited common elements. As a result, the circuit court erred by failing to address the standing issue asserted by the defendants, but nevertheless properly dismissed the plaintiff's complaint; therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

FARRAKHAN v. COMMONWEALTH

The trial court erred in finding a criminal defendant guilty of possession of a concealed weapon described in Virginia Code § 18.2-308(A), having previously been convicted of a felony offense. The kitchen knife the defendant possessed was not a "weapon" because it was neither designed for fighting purposes nor commonly understood to be a "weapon." The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the defendant's conviction is vacated.

Read More »

ROBINSON v. COMMONWEALTH

In the prosecution of a husband and wife on multiple counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor under Code § 18.2-371 arising from a party held at their home at which alcohol was served to their underage son and his guests, the trial court did not err in denying the defendants' motions to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a warrantless search and seizure occurring within the curtilage of their home. Exigent circumstances existed, the investigating officer had probable cause to justify his entry into the curtilage, and he did not exceed the scope of implied consent to such entry. The Court of Appeals' judgment upholding the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

CROCKER v. RIVERSIDE BRICK & SUPPLY CO.

A truck driver employed by a shipping company engaged by a supplier of masonry products to deliver stone to a customer is not barred by the Virginia Workers' Compensation Act from bringing a personal injury claim against the customer since this defendant is an "other party" within the meaning of the Act. The shipping company's driver was not the defendant's statutory employee because, even though she endeavored to assist in unloading the pallets of stone, the unloading of the freight was the sole responsibility of the defendant. The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

ELLISON v. COMMONWEALTH

In a civil proceeding under Code § 37.2-900 et seq., the Commonwealth alleged that an inmate previously convicted of a sexual crime was a sexually violent predator. Under the doctrine of collateral estoppel and the constitutional protections against double jeopardy, the trial court did not err by admitting into evidence in the civil trial evidence from a rape victim in a criminal case where the defendant had been acquitted. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

WESTLAKE PROPERTIES v. WESTLAKE POINTE ASS'N

In a property owners' association's action against the corporate developer of a townhome community and the construction contractor, no error or abuse of discretion is found in the trial court's rulings allowing the association to proceed on a damage claim involving nonparty property owners, finding that the association had standing, concluding that individual property owners were not necessary parties, denying a mistrial arising from impeachment of a witness, or instructing the jury concerning proximate causation and damages. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

SULLIVAN v. ROBERTSON DRUG CO.

In a physician's contribution action against a pharmacist and his employer following the physician's settlement of a malpractice claim, the trial court erred in giving jury instructions suggesting that the pharmacist could not be found liable for the whole, indivisible injury caused by prescribed medications he had dispensed, permitting the jury to apportion damages based on relative degrees of the parties' negligence, and by submitting the reasonableness of the settlement to the jury where the pharmacist failed to present evidence that it was unreasonable or excessive. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial on all issues.

Read More »

JACQUELINE ANN LESESNE v. THADDEUS JOHN ZABLOCKI

Judgment pertaining to the trial court?s ruling that the evidence was sufficient to prove appellee made a gift to appellant of his separate interest in the marital home at the time of the 1997 refinancing is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court for reconsideration; judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. JEFFREY MAURICE WELLS

Trial court did not err in concluding that the evidence presented by the Commonwealth at the suppression hearing failed to establish an investigatory stop based on a reasonable articulable suspicion of the evasion or avoidance of a roadblock; judgment of the trial court affirmed

Read More »

DAVIS v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in rejecting appellant?s claim of self-defense and in finding that appellant used excessive force; appellant?s conviction for assault and battery is affirmed

Read More »

EDGER BARNETT v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to strike the Commonwealth?s evidence as the evidence was sufficient to prove that appellant attempted to break and enter the apartment building with the intent to commit larceny and that he possessed a burglarious tool; appellant?s convictions are affirmed

Read More »

LESESNE v. ZABLOCKI

Judgment pertaining to the trial court?s ruling that the evidence was sufficient to prove appellee made a gift to appellant of his separate interest in the marital home at the time of the 1997 refinancing is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the trial court for reconsideration; judgment affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

Read More »

JERRY LAMONT BARNES v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the prosecutor?s use of a peremptory strike to remove a member of the jury panel was not racially motivated, refusing to instruct the jury that malice may not ordinarily be inferred from a blow with a fist, and refusing to instruct the jury on heat of passion; appellant?s conviction is affirmed

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. WELLS

Trial court did not err in concluding that the evidence presented by the Commonwealth at the suppression hearing failed to establish an investigatory stop based on a reasonable articulable suspicion of the evasion or avoidance of a roadblock; judgment of the trial court affirmed

Read More »

DEVAN ELISA KOCH v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s convictions of forgery and uttering of a public record are affirmed as the evidence was sufficient to prove the community service attendance sheet was a public record within the meaning of Code Section 18.2-168; trial court did not err in admitting into evidence a document providing appellant with notice that the community service attendance sheet was a public record

Read More »

BLANKENSHIP v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant failed to properly preserve for appeal the issue of whether the trial court erred in allowing the prosecutor to make improper remarks to the jury during his closing argument; appellant?s convictions are affirmed

Read More »

NICHOLS v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err finding the evidence was sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of possessing a firearm as a convicted felon

Read More »

BARNETT v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to strike the Commonwealth?s evidence as the evidence was sufficient to prove that appellant attempted to break and enter the apartment building with the intent to commit larceny and that he possessed a burglarious tool; appellant?s convictions are affirmed

Read More »

BARNES v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding the prosecutor?s use of a peremptory strike to remove a member of the jury panel was not racially motivated, refusing to instruct the jury that malice may not ordinarily be inferred from a blow with a fist, and refusing to instruct the jury on heat of passion; appellant?s conviction is affirmed

Read More »

KOCH v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s convictions of forgery and uttering of a public record are affirmed as the evidence was sufficient to prove the community service attendance sheet was a public record within the meaning of Code Section 18.2-168; trial court did not err in admitting into evidence a document providing appellant with notice that the community service attendance sheet was a public record

Read More »

BOOKER v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant?s convictions of forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, and abduction are affirmed as appellant?s right to a statutory speedy trial under Code Section 19.2-243 was not violated

Read More »

LONDON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court abused its discretion by not permitting the substitution of retained counsel and in not granting a reasonable continuance for him to prepare for trial; appellant?s convictions are reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court

Read More »

JAMES RICHARD CHRISTOPHER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not abuse its discretion by relying on the indictments and in denying appellant?s motion for a bill of particulars; the remaining issues are procedurally barred; appellant?s convictions are affirmed

Read More »

DARRIO L. COST v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress as the officer had probable cause to seize the capsules after a pat down; trial court did not err in finding the evidence sufficient to convict appellant of possession of heroin with the intent to distribute

Read More »

KISER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress evidence; appellant?s conviction for possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute is affirmed

Read More »

COST v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant?s motion to suppress as the officer had probable cause to seize the capsules after a pat down; trial court did not err in finding the evidence sufficient to convict appellant of possession of heroin with the intent to distribute

Read More »

ROCKINGHAM MEMORIAL HOSPITAL v. SHIFFLETT

Summary affirmance ? no error in commission?s finding that appellee established she sustained a change in condition causally related to her compensable right knee injury, and, therefore, the two-year limitations period contained in Code Section 65.2-708 was applicable to her claim for temporary total disability benefits

Read More »
Scroll To Top