Eluding Police James Virginia Lawyer Previous Conviction Double Jeopardy
Eluding Police James Virginia Lawyer Previous Conviction Double Jeopardy
Ibrahim v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant appealed the decision of the Circuit court which convicted him of operation of a motor vehicle after having been adjudged an habitual offender.
Issue:
- Whether defendant’s misdemeanor driving convictions barred prosecution of the habitual offender charge?
Discussions:
Defendant was convicted in the city district court of two misdemeanors: failure to stop and attempt to elude police, and reckless driving. Charges of driving under the influence and refusal to take a blood or breath test were nolle prossed. A felony charge of operating a motor vehicle after having been adjudged an habitual offender was certified to the grand jury, which indicted defendant on the charge. Defendant did not appeal his misdemeanor convictions. The trial judge in the circuit court overruled defendant’s contention that his misdemeanor driving convictions barred prosecution of the habitual offender charge. The circuit court found defendant guilty of operation of a motor vehicle after having been adjudged an habitual offender. On appeal, defendant asserted that previous convictions for reckless driving and for failing to stop and attempting to elude a police officer barred the habitual offender charge on double jeopardy grounds. The court affirmed because the fact that the two prosecutions involved the element of driving was not enough to invoke double jeopardy.
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 Stafford Virginia Lawyer Calibration Certificate Vehicle Accuracy
Speeding Stafford Virginia Lawyer Calibration Certificate Vehicle Accuracy
Commonwealth v. Frazer
Facts:
Defendant filed a motion to strike a certificate of calibration of a police vehicle, and objected to the absence of a certificate of calibration of the radar unit in the prosecution of him for speeding.
Issue:
- Whether the proof of the accuracy of a speedometer was sufficiently established?
Discussions:
Radar used in the arrest was a unit attached to the officer’s motorcycle and he testified that the radar was checked by tuning fork and against the speedometer of his motorcycle. He also testified that the radar was operating accurately under such tests. Defendant objected to the manner in which the accuracy of the radar was determined, citing noncompliance with Va. Code Ann. § 46.1-198(a1). The court overruled the motion and found defendant guilty of speeding. The court held that § 46.1-198(a1) was not applicable because there could not have been a hearsay objection to the testimony of the officer since he was the only one involved in the accuracy test. The court ruled that the use of a calibration certificate to show the accuracy of the speedometer in the vehicle used by a police officer or a defendant was permitted under Va. Code Ann. § 46.1-193.1. The court determined that the proof of the accuracy of a speedometer was sufficiently established by showing it was checked against a calibrated master speedometer and that it was done. The court concluded that the Commonwealth established the accuracy of the type radar used by the tuning fork and the motorcycle speedometer.
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 Lynchburg Virginia Lawyer Probable Cause Drug Possession
Traffic Stop Lynchburg Virginia Lawyer Probable Cause Drug Possession
James v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant was stopped for speeding by a state police officer and the officer observed a pack of cigarette wrapping papers on the floorboard of defendant’s car. The officer also observed a brown paper bag folded up beside defendant’s driver’s seat. The officer picked up the bag, looked in it, and discovered marijuana in the bag. Defendant was ultimately convicted of possessing marijuana and he appealed, claiming that the officer did not have probable cause to look in the bag.
Issue:
- Whether the officer had probable cause to believe that defendant possessed marijuana?
Discussions:
The court agreed and reversed the trial court’s judgment. The officer testified that the reason he looked in the bag was based purely on the fact that he saw the cigarette papers lying underneath defendant’s feet on the driver’s side of the car. The court found that it would have been rational to believe that the bag contained tobacco, defendant’s lunch, or any other lawful substance. Thus, the officer did not have probable cause to believe that defendant possessed marijuana and the marijuana evidence was improperly admitted.
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 Prince William Virginia Lawyer Drug Possession Intention Stop
DUI Prince William Virginia Lawyer Drug Possession Intention Stop
Cassandra v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant appealed a decision of the Circuit Court of Prince William County (Virginia) that convicted her for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.
Issue:
- Whether the defendant voluntarily consented to the search of the vehicle?
Discussions:
On appeal from her conviction of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, defendant challenged the stop of her automobile. She contended that she was illegally detained because a state trooper stopped her automobile under a pretext of a drug courier profile. The defendant also contended that consent to search her automobile was obtained by coercion and that certain statements she made were inadmissible because they were made before she was advised of her Miranda rights. The court found that the trial court did not err in finding that the trooper was justified in stopping her vehicle because she met a drug courier profile and she was speeding. The court articulated that the trooper had a justifiable and legal reason (speeding) to stop the vehicle. The court opined that she also voluntarily consented to the search of her vehicle. The court noted that merely advising a defendant that a search warrant could be obtained was not coercion. The court held that the trooper was not required to advise her of her Miranda rights prior to the time she made incriminating statements because she was not in custody, but was merely a subject of a Terry stop.
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 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.
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 Lee Virginia Lawyer Speeding Prosecution
Reckless Driving Lee Virginia Lawyer Speeding Prosecution
Jeffery v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant was charged with driving while intoxicated and issued a summons for speeding.
Issue:
- Whether the defendant’s speeding violation constituted reckless driving under Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-862 and that her prosecution for driving while intoxicated was therefore barred
Discussion:
Defendant contended that her speeding violation constituted reckless driving under Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-862 and that her prosecution for driving while intoxicated was therefore barred by Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294.1, which prohibited conviction of both reckless driving and driving while intoxicated where both charges arose out of the same act or acts. The Commonwealth contended that the offense to which defendant pleaded guilty was simply a speeding offense for which a bond could be posted and not the reckless driving offense contemplated by Virginia law. However, the court held that, because defendant was charged with speeding at a rate that constituted reckless driving, the prosecution of the case against her for driving while intoxicated was barred by § 19.2-294.1. The court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, which it treated as a plea in bar.
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 Expunge Improper
Reckless Driving Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Expunge Improper
White v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Petitioner moved the court to expunge police and court records relating to a sale and/or distribution of marijuana charge as well as a reckless driving charge.
Issue:
- Whether the defendant’s motion to expunge ahs to be granted?
Discussion:
Petitioner moved the court to expunge police and court records relating to a sale and/or distribution of marijuana charge as well as a reckless driving charge. The circuit court granted the motion. Petitioner was charged with the sale and/or distribution of marijuana in 2001 and that charge was subsequently nolle prosequi. The parties agreed that petitioner was entitled to expungement of records relating to the marijuana charge pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-392.2(A) (2011). Further, the continued existence and possible dissemination of information relating to that charge might cause a manifest injustice to petitioner. Accordingly, the motion to expunge all police and court records relating to that charge was granted. With regard to the reckless driving charge, he did not plead guilty to reckless driving, nor did the trial court make a finding of guilt as to the reckless driving charge. He was never found guilty of the charge he sought to have expunged. When he pled guilty to improper driving, he pled to an offense separate and distinct from reckless driving. Thus, expungement was proper. Petitioner’s motion to expunge was granted.
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 Traffic Stop Drunk Drive
Reckless Driving Fairfax Virginia Lawyer Traffic Stop Drunk Drive
Roothan v. Commonwealth
Facts:
While defendant sat in the driver’s seat of a vehicle stopped at a tollbooth, a police officer approached the vehicle, smelled alcohol, and arrested defendant. After defendant, a habitual offender, was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol, the trial court imposed a felony sentence under Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-357(B)(2) because defendant’s drunken driving had allegedly endangered the vehicle’s passengers. Accordingly, defendant sought review, claiming nobody had been endangered and as such, the trial court should have imposed a misdemeanor sentence, pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-357(B)(1). Defendant sought review of a judgment from the Circuit Court of Fairfax County (Virginia)
Issue:
- Whether the trial court properly convicted the defendant for drunken driving?
Discussion:
The court held that even though defendant had been negligent in operating the vehicle, defendant’s intoxication had not been such that it had elevated defendant’s conduct to the level of reckless driving. Thus, the court held the evidence had failed to prove that defendant’s drunken driving had endangered others, as required by Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-357(B)(2). In reversing a judgment which sentenced defendant as a felon after convicting defendant, a habitual offender, of driving under the influence of alcohol, the court held that because defendant’s drunken driving had not been reckless, the evidence had not supported the trial court’s finding of endangerment and its imposition of a felony sentence
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.






