Excess Speed Prince William Virginia Lawyer Reckless Driving
Excess Speed Prince William Virginia Lawyer Reckless Driving
Philips v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant was driving on a highway in the Commonwealth in excess of eighty miles per hour. As a result, he was issued a summons for reckless driving by speed. The trial court conducted a trial on the charge. At the close of the evidence, the Commonwealth proffered a jury instruction instructing the jury that in order to find him guilty of reckless driving by speed, the jury had to find beyond a reasonable doubt that James was traveling on a public highway and that he was traveling in excess of eighty miles per hour. Jury in the Circuit Court of Prince William County convicted defendant of reckless driving by speed, in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-862. Defendant appealed.
Excess Speed Prince William Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in denying his proposed jury instruction that improper driving, an offense set forth in Code § 46.2-869, is a lesser-included offense of reckless driving by speed?
Discussion:
The Court held that the improper driving was not a lesser-included offense of reckless driving by speed. Every commission of reckless driving by speed did not also constitute improper driving. In addition, improper driving was not composed entirely of the elements of reckless driving by speed. Improper driving required an additional finding of slight culpability, an element excluded from § 46.2-862. The plain and unambiguous reading of § 46.2-869 made clear that authority rested with the trial judge and not the jury to make the lesser degree of culpability determination. In the alternative, an attorney for the Commonwealth may have reduced a reckless driving charge to improper driving at any time before the court’s decision. Thus, only the trial judge, or the prosecutor before the verdict was rendered, had the prerogative to reduce a reckless driving charge to improper driving under § 46.2-869. For these reasons, this court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
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 Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Driving Endanger Life
Reckless Driving Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Driving Endanger Life
Williams v. Commonwealth
Facts:
The Circuit Court of Amherst County, Virginia, convicted defendant of reckless driving. Defendant contended that the evidence was not sufficient to prove his driving endangered the life, limb or property of any person, in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-852 and appealed.
Reckless Driving Fairfax Virginia Lawyer
ISSUES:
The issue here is whether the Defendant has preserved his right to appeal on the issue of insufficiency of evidence.
DISCUSSION:
Where an issue of sufficiency of evidence is presented to a trial court, sitting without a jury, in a motion to strike at the conclusion of the Commonwealth’s evidence and, upon its denial and upon conclusion of the defendant’s evidence, the same issue is presented in the defendant’s final argument to the court, the defendant has preserved his right to appeal this issue, even though he did not make a motion to strike at the conclusion of his own evidence. On appeal, a ruling of a trial court will not be reversed unless an objection is stated “together with the grounds therefor at the time of the ruling, except for good cause shown or to enable the Court of Appeals to attain the ends of justice. If appellant’s closing argument alerts the trial court to the grounds on which he bases his argument, Rule 5A:18 is satisfied. The phrase, “credibility of the witnesses,” does not preserve the issue presented. Taken in the context of his closing argument, appellant appeared to address the credibility of the witnesses on the issue of whether Flood Road was a “highway,” not their credibility on other elements of the crime. Appellant did not alert the trial court that he was arguing the Commonwealth failed to prove the elements of the offense of reckless driving. The trial court was not adequately advised of appellant’s position. As appellant did not raise the issue of recklessness, the trial court could not consider his specific argument nor could the trial court take corrective action. Sufficiency issue raised by appellant on appeal is procedurally defaulted under Rule 5A:18.
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
