Virginia Fairfax Traffic Lawyer Public Highway Suspended Driving
Virginia Fairfax Traffic Lawyer Public Highway Suspended Driving
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax Prince William Richmond Loudoun Virginia Beach Fredericksburg Lynchburg
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
Mason v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant sought review of the judgment of the Circuit Court of Fairfax (Virginia), which convicted defendant of perjury in contravention of Va. Code § 18.2-434 in connection with his testimony at trial on a charge of driving a motor vehicle on a public highway after his privilege to drive had been suspended. Defendant testified at that trial that he had not received notice that his driving license had been suspended.
If you are facing a traffic case in Fairfax, Virginia, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
Virginia Fairfax Traffic Lawyer Public Highway Suspended Driving
Holdings:
The Virginia Court made the following holding:
- Va. Code § 18.2-434 provides in part: If any person to whom an oath is lawfully administered on any occasion willfully swear falsely on such occasion touching any material matter or thing, he shall be guilty of perjury.
- In a prosecution under Va. Code § 18.2-434, the Commonwealth of Virginia must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, inter alia, that defendant willfully swore falsely. If the defendant believes the facts stated by him to be true, he may not properly be said to have willfully sworn falsely to such facts.
- If the untrue representation does not touch any material matter or thing in the trial, Va. Code § 18.2-434, the mere falsity of the statement alone will not sustain a perjury conviction. The testimony must have been relevant in the trial of the case, either to the main issue or some collateral issue.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax Prince William Richmond Loudoun Virginia Beach Fredericksburg Lynchburg
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket.
A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Loudoun, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Fairfax Court House Detail:
Fairfax Circuit Court
4110 Chain Bridge Road,
Fairfax, VA 22030.
Fairfax County General District Court
4110 Chain Bridge Road,
Fairfax, VA 22030.
Fairfax County Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court
4110 Chain Bridge Road,
Fairfax, VA 22030-4020.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Virginia Traffic Ticket Richmond Lawyers Punishment Reckless Driving
Virginia Traffic Ticket Richmond Lawyers Punishment Reckless Driving
Dustin v Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence for the crime of reckless driving in violation Virginia traffic laws. The circuit court of Richmond fixed defendant’s punishment at a penalty of $ 100 and the defendant initially paid the traffic ticket fine..
If you are facing a traffic case in Richmond, Virginia, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
Virginia Traffic Ticket Richmond Lawyers
Holdings:
The Virginia Court made the following holding:
- The law relative to reckless driving within the city limits, provides that any person who drives a vehicle upon a highway recklessly, or at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger life, limb or property of any person shall be guilty of reckless driving.
- The court considers the evidence and all reasonable inferences flowing from that evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth of Virginia, the prevailing party at trial.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket.
A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Suspended License Fairfax County Virginia Habitual Offender Lawyers
Suspended License Fairfax County Virginia Habitual Offender Lawyers
Peter John v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Fact:
Defendant was convicted of being a habitual offender under the Virginia Habitual Offender Act, which was based on a conviction of driving under the influence and two subsequent convictions of driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license. On appeal, defendant argued that his convictions for driving under the influence and driving on a suspended license arose out of but one act of driving and did not, therefore, result from “separate acts” as contemplated by the Act.
Suspended License Fairfax County Virginia Habitual Offender Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the two 1968 convictions, having resulted from offenses occurring at the same time, arose “out of separate acts” within the meaning of Code § 46.1-387.2 and count as second and third convictions of the defendant, thereby constituting him a habitual offender?
Discussion:
The defendant’s 1968 conviction of driving under the influence was not barred, under Code § 19.1-259, by his contemporaneous conviction of driving on a suspended license, or vice versa. This is so because the defendant could have been convicted of driving under the influence without evidence of the suspension of his driver’s license, and he could have been convicted of driving on a suspended license without evidence of his intoxication. Since it was not the “same act” that gave rise to violation of the two statutes under which the defendant was convicted in 1968, it follows that the two convictions arose” out of separate acts” — one out of the act of driving under the influence and the other out of the act of driving on a suspended license. Therefore, the convictions must be counted individually as second and third convictions, thereby constituting the defendant a habitual offender.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Reckless Driving Virginia DUI Charge Lawyers Appomattox County
Reckless Driving Virginia DUI Charge Lawyers Appomattox County
Rc. Hillary v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Facts:
Defendant said his two offenses grew out of the same act or acts of driving, and one charge should have been dismissed under Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1. Defendant was convicted in the Circuit Court of Appomattox County (Virginia) of driving under the influence and reckless driving. He appealed.
Reckless Driving Virginia DUI Charge Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in determining, as a matter of law, that defendant could be convicted for both driving under the influence and reckless driving?
Discussion:
The appellate court held the offenses of which defendant was convicted were covered by § 19.2-294.1, under which, when he was convicted of one of the charges, the remaining charge had to be dismissed if the offenses grew out of the same act or acts. His “offending conduct” was intimately related in time and distance, arising from and connected by one continuous, uninterrupted operation of his car. He was initially pursued because he was observed to be speeding. Although police subsequently lost sight of his car for three to five minutes, there was no evidence that he discontinued operation of his car before he was stopped. No evidence gave rise to any reasonable inference that he did anything other than engage in a continuous operation of his vehicle. The trial court erred in determining, as a matter of law, that he could be convicted for both driving under the influence and reckless driving for his continuous, uninterrupted course of operation of a motor vehicle. Defendant’s convictions were reversed and the matter was remanded with directions to dismiss one of the charges.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
DUI Virginia Reckless Driving Suspended Revoked Lawyers Lee County
DUI Virginia Reckless Driving Suspended Revoked Lawyers Lee County
Coles v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant sought review of orders from the Circuit Court of Lee County (Virginia), which affirmed the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of a 60-day jail sentence previously entered against defendant in a case brought by the Commonwealth of Virginia.
DUI Virginia Reckless Driving Suspended Revoked Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the judgment of the circuit court affirming the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of a 60-day jail sentence entered against defendant should be reversed?
Discussion:
Defendant was convicted of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The conviction resulted in the suspension of defendant’s permit to operate an automobile for a year. Defendant subsequently was arrested on a warrant charging him with reckless driving and driving after his operator’s license had been revoked. On appeal, the court held that the reading of the plain language of the statute showed that both the suspension of sentence and the revocation of such suspension were left to the discretion of the trial court. There was no requirement that the suspension could be revoked only upon the conviction of a subsequent criminal offense. However, the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain an order of revocation was a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court. Its finding of fact and judgment thereon were reversible only upon a clear showing of abuse of such discretion. The judgment of the circuit court, which affirmed the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of sentence, was affirmed. The judgment of the circuit court, which affirmed the judgment of the trial justice in revoking the suspension of a 60-day jail sentence entered against defendant, was affirmed
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Traffic Stop Virginia Drugs Cocaine Lawyers Brunswick County
Traffic Stop Virginia Drugs Cocaine Lawyers Brunswick County
Mc. RENOLD v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Facts:
A police officer observed a pickup truck with an inoperative brake light. He stopped the vehicle and intending to issue Ellis a summons for inoperative brake light. The officer recalled that Ellis and her passenger had a “previous narcotics history.” This conversation took about a minute. On his way back to his vehicle, the officer called for a canine narcotics unit to assist him. He then got back into his vehicle to issue the summons for the equipment violation. The canine narcotics unit arrived and searched Ellis and discovered cocaine. Ellis was convicted by the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach of possession of cocaine.
Traffic Stop Virginia Drugs Cocaine Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in fails to suppress the evidence of cocaine found on her person during a traffic stop?
Discussion:
The court held that “the officer’s one-minute conversation about drugs cannot be characterized as an exploitive, unconstitutional act. Where a seizure of a person is based on probable cause to believe that a traffic violation was committed, an officer does not violate the Fourth Amendment by asking a few questions about matters unrelated to the traffic violation, even if this conversation briefly extends the length of the detention. Ellis consented to a search while being detained by an officer having probable cause to issue her a citation for a malfunctioning brake light. The drug dog’s multiple alerts and Ellis’s subsequent consent took place before the officer completed the paperwork necessary for issuing a summons for the equipment violation. The brief, incremental delay caused by the officer’s questions regarding drugs did not violate the Fourth Amendment and, a fortiori, did not constitute an exploitive basis for securing Ellis’s consent.” This court finds that no error in trial court reasoning or result, affirmed the trial court judgment.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Traffic Stop Virginia Drug Transaction Lawyers Carroll County
Traffic Stop Virginia Drug Transaction Lawyers Carroll County
HALLS V. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Facts:
Defendant filed a motion to suppress on the basis that the initial stop of his automobile violated his constitutional rights under U.S. Const. amend. IV. At a hearing for defendant’s motion to suppress, police officers testified that they observed a vehicle pull up to a group of six to eight men. One of the men left the group and walked toward the vehicle. The man bent down, reached into the vehicle, removed his hand and walked back to the group. Believing that they had observed a drug transaction, the officers pulled the automobile over shortly after it left the group. The Commonwealth argued that the stop of defendant’s vehicle was a permissible stop under Terry v. Ohio, because the officers were trained to identify potential drug transactions. The court found that neither officer saw anything exchanged between the occupants of the vehicle or the man who left the group to approach the vehicle. The officers did not hear any conversation between the men and did not observe any suspicious activity in the vehicle.
Traffic Stop Virginia Drug Transaction Lawyers
Issues:
- Whether the officer has sufficient specific objective facts to create a reasonable suspicion that the occupants of the vehicle may be involved in criminal activity?
Discussion:
The court determined that the facts did not create a reasonable suspicion that the occupants of the vehicle had engaged in criminal activity. Since the evidence was insufficient to justify stopping defendant’s vehicle, court concluded that defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated. The court granted defendant’s motion to suppress.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Suspended License Virginia Traffic Violation Unlawful Driving Lawyers Louisa County
Suspended License Virginia Traffic Violation Unlawful Driving Lawyers Louisa County
JOHN V COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Facts:
Defendant “involved in a traffic violation” in Louisa County and issued him a summons for reckless driving. At the time, defendant had a valid operator’s license in his possession. The trooper later determined that defendant’s privileges to operate a motor vehicle had been suspended by an order of the Virginia Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) issued on October 19, 1977. The trooper then obtained a warrant charging defendant with unlawfully operating “a motor vehicle on [a] public highway after his privilege to drive had been suspended.” Defendant sought review of the judgment of the Circuit Court of Louisa County (Virginia), which convicted defendant of perjury in contravention of Va. Code § 18.2-434 in connection with his testimony at trial on a charge of driving a motor vehicle on a public highway after his privilege to drive had been suspended. Defendant testified at that trial that he had not received notice that his driving license had been suspended. Defendant was given a traffic citation for reckless driving, and had a valid driver’s license in his possession. The state trooper later determined that defendant’s license had been suspended at the time of the citation. The trooper obtained a warrant charging defendant with driving with a suspended license.
Suspended License Virginia Traffic Violation Unlawful Driving Lawyers
Issues:
- Whether the language of the order accomplishes a suspension of defendant’s driver’s license?
Discussion:
At trial, defendant testified that he had not received notice that his license had been suspended, and the charge was dismissed. Defendant was later indicted for perjury, and the evidence adduced at trial showed that a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) employee had personally advised defendant that his license had been suspended, and the evidence further showed that a copy of the suspension order had been mailed to and received by defendant. Defendant was convicted and sought review. The court affirmed. Defendant argued that his statement was not false because the notice letter was so vague that it did not advise him that his license was suspended. The court found that the letter was a DMV form letter in which inapplicable terms had not been crossed out, but held that when viewed in its entirety, the letter was sufficient to notify defendant that his license was suspended. The court affirmed defendant’s conviction for perjury over his objection that he did not falsely state that he did not know his driver’s license was suspended because the DMV notice letter was so vague that it did not advise him of the suspension.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Suspended License Virginia Restoration License Habitual Offender Attorneys Augusta County
Suspended License Virginia Restoration License Habitual Offender Attorneys Augusta County
MERCHANT V. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Facts:
The motorist was determined to be a habitual traffic offender based on three predicate offenses of driving while his license was suspended or revoked. The evidence showed the predicate convictions resulted from his failure to pay fines and costs. Thereafter, the motorist filed a petition for restoration of his operator’s license. The Commonwealth opposed the petition on the grounds he was a habitual offender who had not answered a speeding citation.
Suspended License Virginia Restoration License Habitual Offender Attorneys
Issue:
- Whether the operator’s license can be restored as the defendant has three predicate convictions?
Discussions:
The Commonwealth argued that restoration of the motorist’s operator’s license should not be permitted because, at the time of all three predicate convictions, he was also under suspension for failing to answer a speeding citation in another place. The motorist presented evidence that he had paid all outstanding fines and costs, including the one involving the speeding citation. The Commonwealth also asked that restoration be denied because of the motorist’s less than exemplary driving record.
When a person has been adjudged an habitual offender based solely upon convictions of driving on a suspended license for failure to pay fines and costs, he may petition the court at any time for restoration of this license upon proof that all outstanding fines and costs have been paid. In other words, there is no mandatory waiting period as in other habitual offender cases.
The court is of the opinion that the DMV suspension of Mr. Merchant’ licence under § 46.2-946 resulted from his failure to pay fines and costs in Arkansas. Arkansas notified DMV, even before Mr. Merchant was convicted, that Mr. Merchant had “failed to comply with the terms of the citation.” The terms of the citation with which Mr. Merchant failed to comply were, obviously, payment of fines and costs associated with that speeding citation.
Thus, at the time of the predicate convictions, all of Mr. Merchant’ suspensions were the result of failure to pay fines and costs. To hold otherwise would create an anomaly that the legislature surely did not intend: a person declared an habitual offender whose predicate offenses result from failure to pay fines and costs in Virginia courts would be eligible for immediate restoration upon proof that all outstanding fines and costs have been paid but if that person were under suspension for failure to pay an out-of-state citation, he would not be eligible for restoration even after he paid that fine and costs.
While acknowledging the many traffic violations on Mr. Merchant’ record, the court will not deny restoration for that reason in this case. Since Mr. Merchant was declared an habitual offender almost two years ago, he has accumulated no more violations, he has paid thousands of dollars in fines and costs, and he has attended a driving school to which he was assigned by DMV. The court will restore Mr. Merchant’ license under § 46.2-361(B).
Judgment:
The court ordered that the motorist’s license be restored.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Reckless Driving Virginia Traffic Ticket Alcosensor Breath Test Lawyers Roanoke County
Reckless Driving Virginia Traffic Ticket Alcosensor Breath Test Lawyers Roanoke County
NICHOLS BATA V. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Facts:
Defendant sought review of the judgment of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, which convicted him of Reckless Driving under the influence of alcohol. Defendant contended that the trial court erred by allowing the Commonwealth to introduce evidence of the results of a preliminary alcosensor breath test.
Reckless Driving Virginia Traffic Ticket Alcosensor Breath Test Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred by permitting the Commonwealth to introduce evidence of the results of a preliminary alcosensor breath test?
Discussion:
The court finds that at trial, the Commonwealth introduced into evidence a certificate of refusal signed by Nichols. Nichols testified that he refused the test because he had performed well on the field test. To rebut that testimony the Commonwealth was permitted to introduce over Nichols’ objection the results of the preliminary alcosensor field test which showed a blood alcohol concentration of 0.15% present. The Commonwealth specifically proffered the results, and the trial court limited their admission, to rebut Nichols’ testimony regarding the reason for refusing to submit to a blood or breath test. Although alcosensor results are otherwise inadmissible, Nichols opened the door for such admission by testifying that he had performed “fine” on the field test, thereby urging the court to find that he had acted reasonably. Since the evidence was admitted for the limited purpose to rebut Nichols’ claim that he had done “fine” on the test and thus that his refusal was reasonable, and not to prove that he drove under the influence, the trial court properly admitted the evidence and did not consider it for an improper purpose.
The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your traffic ticket. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your traffic ticket. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your traffic ticket in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
8:00 AM – 12:00 AM Midnight
Former State Trooper
