Home (page 4)

Tag Archives: Justice Teresa M. Chafin

CAV: Prior statement was cumulative, corroborated (access required)

Even if a witness’s prior consistent written statement did not meet the standards for admissibility under the applicable hearsay exception, it didn’t affect the jury verdict because it was corroborated by substantial other testimony. Background Appellant Juan Candelaria and Joseph ...

Read More »

CAV: No “similar” offense needed for “sexually violent” label (access required)

Because the defendant had been required by the State of Idaho to register with the state’s sex-offender and crimes-against-minors registry, Virginia law classifies him as a sexually violent offender who must re-register every 90 days. Background In 2004, Appellant Thomas ...

Read More »

CAV: Probation could be delayed pending unrelated jail time (access required)

The trial court did not err in abating the defendant’s probation term during her active incarceration for an unrelated crime, without following the notice and hearing requirements of Code § 19.2-304. Background On May 31, 2013, Appellant Lanikki Edwards entered ...

Read More »

CAV: No evidence that seeing needle caused EMT to faint (access required)

The Commission erred in concluding that an EMT, who had previously felt light-headed but never fainted when seeing large needle injections, showed that his loss of consciousness was caused by observing a spinal injection. Background On July 1, 2016, Appellee ...

Read More »

CAV: Father wrongly excluded from adoption proceedings (access required)

Denying an incarcerated father’s request for transportation to his child’s adoption hearing, without offering him an alternative means to participate, was an abuse of the trial court’s discretion. Background On June 20, 2016, Appellee Shawn B. Foster, joined by his ...

Read More »

CAV: Conviction upheld despite altered Miranda warning (access required)

An arresting officer’s addition of the phrase “if you’re charged with a crime” to the standard Miranda warning effectively put the defendant on notice of his constitutional rights, and his subsequent incriminating statements were admissible. Background On August 3, 2012, ...

Read More »