DUI Alexandria Virginia Lawyer Speeding Reckless Violation Infraction
DUI Alexandria Virginia Lawyer Speeding Reckless Violation Infraction
Jackson v. Commonwealth
Facts:
In a motion to dismiss, defendant challenged a charge of driving while under the influence of intoxicants in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-266 after his speeding charge was converted to reckless driving because it violated Va. Code Ann. §19.2-294.1.
DUI Alexandria Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether conviction for speeding bars the conviction for DUI?
Discussions:
Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants and with speeding 55 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone. Both charges grew out of the same driving activity. Defendant prepaid the speeding charge and claimed that Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-862 converted his speeding charge to a reckless driving charge. Defendant alleged that he was convicted of speeding by virtue of this payment of the fines and costs and therefore he could not be prosecuted for the driving under the influence charge because Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1 prevented dual convictions of driving under the influence and reckless driving. On review, the court disagreed holding that defendant’s argument required that he be charged with and convicted of reckless driving. The court stated that speeding was a traffic infraction and reckless driving was a misdemeanor. In addition, the court determined that § 19.2-294.1 only applied if defendant was charged with driving under the influence and reckless driving. The court held that where the evidence supported prosecution under two parallel statutes, the Commonwealth had the right to elect under which statute to proceed.
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 Loudoun Virginia Lawyer Speeding Separate
Reckless Driving Loudoun Virginia Lawyer Speeding Separate
Chang v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant was convicted in the Circuit Court of Loudoun County (Virginia) of DUI in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-266. He had previously pled guilty to speeding in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-870. Both charges arose from the same course of driving. He asserted that the DUI conviction was barred by Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1 because the speeding conviction constituted a conviction for reckless driving.
Reckless Driving Loudoun Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether reckless driving and speeding were separate and distinct offenses?
Discussion:
Defendant contended that the lower court was required to dismiss the DUI charge because he had already pled guilty and been convicted of an offense that was by statute deemed reckless driving. The court disagreed and held that reckless driving and speeding were separate and distinct offenses. If the legislature had intended to foreclose a person from being convicted for both DUI and another offense that might also constitute reckless driving, as argued by defendant, it would have expressed that intent in the language of Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1. Under the express provisions of § 19.2-294.1 only a conviction for reckless driving barred a prosecution for DUI. A conviction for speeding, even if premised on an underlying act that may have warranted a conviction for reckless driving, did not implicate the bar of the statute. Defendant was charged and convicted for speeding under a town ordinance incorporating Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-870. He was not convicted of reckless driving. Although the Commonwealth could have prosecuted defendant for reckless driving for that offense, it chose instead to prosecute him for the offense of speeding. The judgment convicting defendant of DUI 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.
Speeding Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Intoxication Dual Conviction
Speeding Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Intoxication Dual Conviction
Strickler v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants and with speeding 55 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone. Both charges grew out of the same driving activity. Defendant prepaid the speeding charge and claimed that Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-862 converted his speeding charge to a reckless driving charge In a motion to dismiss, defendant challenged a charge of driving while under the influence of intoxicants in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-266 after his speeding charge was converted to reckless driving because it violated Va. Code Ann. §19.2-294.1.
Speeding Fairfax Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether the defendant was prevented for dual convictions of driving under the influence and reckless driving under Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1?
Discussion:
This court disagreed holding that defendant’s argument required that he be charged with and convicted of reckless driving. The court stated that speeding was a traffic infraction and reckless driving was a misdemeanor. In addition, the court determined that § 19.2-294.1 only applied if defendant was charged with driving under the influence and reckless driving. The court held that where the evidence supported prosecution under two parallel statutes, the Commonwealth had the right to elect under which statute to proceed
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 Bedford Virginia Lawyer Signal Lane Change
Reckless Driving Bedford Virginia Lawyer Signal Lane Change
Commonwealth v. Mitchell
Facts:
Defendant, after falling to engage his turn signal for a lane change, evaded the police. The chase led from a point more than one mile inside the city to a location more than one mile into an adjoining county. The city convicted him of reckless driving. The county convicted him of driving while intoxicated, but dismissed the reckless driving charge. Defendant challenged the decision of the Circuit Court of Bedford County (Virginia), which convicted him of reckless driving based upon the same act from an earlier conviction for reckless driving.
Reckless Driving Bedford Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
Whether Defendant’s earlier city conviction barred prosecution of the driving while intoxicated charge because it grew out of the same act, that is, the high-speed chase?
Discussion:
The court reversed, holding that the same act meant the same act of driving and contemplated a continuous, uninterrupted course of operation of a motor vehicle, without regard to the crossing of the boundary line between two localities. From the moment the police first observed defendant until finally apprehended, defendant engaged in a continuous, uninterrupted course of driving. The charges against him, therefore, grew out of the same act or acts within the meaning of Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1. Hence, the earlier city conviction of reckless driving required the dismissal of the latter driving while intoxicated charge
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.
Speeding Arlington Virginia Lawyer DUI Prosecution Conviction
Speeding Arlington Virginia Lawyer DUI Prosecution Conviction
Jackson v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Jackson was convicted in the Circuit Court of Arlington County of DUI in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-266. He had previously pled guilty to speeding in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-870. Both charges arose from the same course of driving. He asserted that the DUI conviction was barred by Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1 because the speeding conviction constituted a conviction for reckless driving.
Speeding Arlington Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether the DUI prosecution and conviction were barred by the speeding conviction because, under Code § 46.2-862, the speeding conviction constituted a conviction for reckless driving?
Discussion:
The Court held that reckless driving and speeding were separate and distinct offenses. If the legislature had intended to foreclose a person from being convicted for both DUI and another offense that might also constitute reckless driving, as argued by defendant, it would have expressed that intent in the language of Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1. Under the express provisions of § 19.2-294.1, only a conviction for reckless driving barred a prosecution for DUI. A conviction for speeding, even if premised on an underlying act that may have warranted a conviction for reckless driving, did not implicate the bar of the statute. Defendant was charged and convicted for speeding under a town ordinance incorporating Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-870. He was not convicted of reckless driving. Although the Commonwealth could have prosecuted defendant for reckless driving for that offense, it chose instead to prosecute him for the offense of speeding.
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.
Speeding Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Evidence Summons Offense
Speeding Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Evidence Summons Offense
Greener v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant challenged the judgment of the General District Court for the County of Fairfax (Virginia), which convicted defendant of speeding. The charge identified the location of the offense as one county, but at trial, defendant presented evidence that it occurred in a different county.
Speeding Fairfax Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether the defendant was guilty of speeding in the county as charged in the summons?
Discussions:
At the conclusion of the Commonwealth’s evidence and again at the conclusion of the trial, defendant moved to strike the evidence and dismiss the charge based upon the evidence presented that the offense had in fact occurred in a county other than the one indicated on the summons. On this point, the evidence of the Commonwealth and that of defendant were in conflict. At the conclusion of all of the evidence and after defendant moved to strike the Commonwealth’s evidence that the attorney for the Commonwealth moved to conform the summons to the evidence. The court reversed and held that under Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-137, a court’s discretion in amending or issuing a new warrant in order to conform the warrant to the proof was not unlimited. When the evidence was concluded and defendant’s motion to strike was made, the court was bound to take the warrant as it then read. Throughout the trial, defendant had challenged the venue of the prosecution and accordingly, under Va. Code Ann. § 19.1-244, any question of venue was not waived. The court concluded that the defendant was not guilty of speeding in the county as charged in the summons, and dismissed the charge.
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.
Impaired Driving Fairfax County Virginia Blood Test Alcohol Lawyers
Impaired Driving Fairfax County Virginia Blood Test Alcohol Lawyers
James v. Town of Christiansburg
Fact:
After the car he was driving was stopped, defendant exhibited several indicia of intoxication. Defendant challenged the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the punishments for driving under the influence of intoxicants and for impaired driving, that if it had a reasonable doubt as to the grade of offense that they should find defendant guilty of the lower grade, and what constituted impaired driving. The trial court, interpreting Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-56.1, ruled that, because there was no evidence of a blood test showing defendant’s blood-alcohol content to be between 0.10 and 0.15 percent, the offense of impaired driving could not be considered by the jury.
Impaired Driving Fairfax County Virginia Blood Test Alcohol Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether under Code § 18.1-56.1, which makes impaired driving a lesser included offense of drunk driving, the defendant was entitled to have the jury instructed on the lesser offense although there was no evidence of a blood test?
Observation and Holding:
The first paragraph of the statute creates and defines the offense of impaired driving. Under the language of the first clause of the second paragraph it is perfectly manifest that in every prosecution for driving while intoxicated an accused may be convicted of the lesser included offense of impaired driving. While the second clause of the second paragraph provides that a presumption of impaired driving arises when the alcoholic content of a person’s blood is within a specified range, the language of the statute does not make evidence of blood-alcohol content within the specified range mandatory before the lesser offense can be considered. Hence in every prosecution for driving under the influence of intoxicants an accused is entitled to have the triers of fact consider the offense of impaired driving even though there is no evidence of the alcoholic content of his blood. We hold that under the provisions of Code § 18.1-56.1 the trial court erred in not granting the instructions requested by the defendant. The judgment of conviction is set aside and the case is reversed and remanded.
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 Suppression Motion Field Sobriety Tests Lawyers Rockingham County
DUI Virginia Suppression Motion Field Sobriety Tests Lawyers Rockingham County
Charles v. Commonwealth
Facts:
After the Circuit Court of Rockingham County, Virginia denied his motion to suppress, defendant entered a conditional guilty plea of driving under the influence (DUI), third or subsequent offense within 10 years, under Va. Code § 18.2-266. He then appealed, contending the trial court erred finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest him.
DUI Virginia Suppression Motion Field Sobriety Tests Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest defendant?
Discussion:
An officer stopped defendant for running a red light. Defendant had an odor of alcohol emanating from him, and failed one of three field sobriety tests. Before administering the PBT, the officer read defendant an “implied consent card” and told him he was not required to take the PBT, that it was strictly “for the benefit of probable cause,” and that the result of the PBT could not be used against him “in court” (rather than “in any prosecution,” as set forth in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-267(F)). The appellate court held that the advisement, though inartful, complied with § 18.2-267(F). The officer’s testimony that the PBT machine he used had been calibrated and checked for accuracy and that he had properly cleared it before administering the test supported the trial court’s finding that the test results were admissible at the hearing. As defendant never argued that the trial court could not rely on the PBT result because it was not in evidence, he could not raise this argument on appeal. Evidence that defendant ran a red light, smelled of alcohol, failed a field sobriety test, and registered positive on the PBT gave the officer probable cause to arrest him. The judgment 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.
DUI Virginia Warrant Motor Vehicle Intoxication Lawyers Lee County
DUI Virginia Warrant Motor Vehicle Intoxication Lawyers Lee County
Danny v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant appealed his conviction in the Circuit Court of Lee County (Virginia) for impaired driving, a violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-56.1.
DUI Virginia Warrant Motor Vehicle Intoxication Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to quash the warrant?
Discussion:
Defendant had been charged with unlawfully operating a motor vehicle over the highways while under the influence of intoxicants or self administered drugs. He was tried in the county court and acquitted of the charge, but was found guilty of impaired driving. Defendant contended that the trial court erred in denying his motion to quash the warrant because the terms of the impaired driving statute did not permit his prosecution in the circuit court upon a charge of impaired driving. He contended that he could not be prosecuted or convicted for a violation of § 18.1-56.1 except as a lesser included offense of a prosecution for violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-54. The court affirmed, finding that § 18.1-56.1 did not permit an interpretation that required automatic dismissal of every charge of impaired driving reaching a court of record on appeal. The court found that the language of Va. Code Ann. § 18.1-56.1 made it clear that impaired driving was a lesser included offense included within the driving under the influence statute. The court held that the statutory definition of impaired driving was sufficient to withstand an attack of vagueness. The court affirmed defendant’s impaired driving conviction.
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 Suppression Breath Test Admissible Lawyers York County
DUI Virginia Suppression Breath Test Admissible Lawyers York County
Tim v. Commonwealth
Facts:
After the Circuit Court of York County, Virginia denied his motion to suppress, defendant entered a conditional guilty plea of driving under the influence (DUI), third or subsequent offense within 10 years, under Va. Code § 18.2-266. He then appealed, contending the trial court erred finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest him.
DUI Virginia Suppression Breath Test Admissible Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding at the suppression hearing that the result of a preliminary breath test (PBT) was admissible and that probable cause existed to arrest defendant?
Discussion:
An officer stopped defendant for running a red light. Defendant had an odor of alcohol emanating from him, and failed one of three field sobriety tests. Before administering the PBT, the officer read defendant an “implied consent card” and told him he was not required to take the PBT, that it was strictly “for the benefit of probable cause,” and that the result of the PBT could not be used against him “in court” (rather than “in any prosecution,” as set forth in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-267(F)). The appellate court held that the advisement, though inartful, complied with § 18.2-267(F). The officer’s testimony that the PBT machine he used had been calibrated and checked for accuracy and that he had properly cleared it before administering the test supported the trial court’s finding that the test results were admissible at the hearing. As defendant never argued that the trial court could not rely on the PBT result because it was not in evidence, he could not raise this argument on appeal. Evidence that defendant ran a red light, smelled of alcohol, failed a field sobriety test, and registered positive on the PBT gave the officer probable cause to arrest him. The judgment 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.
8:00 AM – 12:00 AM Midnight
Former State Trooper
