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.
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.
Eluding Police James Virginia Lawyer
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.
Speeding Stafford Virginia Lawyer
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.
License Revocation Lynchburg Virginia Lawyer Motor Vehicle Reckless Driving Evidence
License Revocation Lynchburg Virginia Lawyer Motor Vehicle Reckless Driving Evidence
Fernandez v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Plaintiff driver appealed from the judgment of the Corporation Court for the City of Lynchburg (Virginia), which dismissed his petition to set aside the revocation of his driver’s license by defendant Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles in accordance with Va. Code § 2154(186). The trial court rejected the driver’s argument that Va. Code § 2154(187) entitled the driver to a hearing before revocation.
License Revocation Lynchburg Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether there was any conflict between Va. Code § 2154(186) and Va. Code § 2154(187)?
Discussions:
The driver had two un-appealed convictions for reckless driving within a year. The Director revoked his license and refused to review the revocation on the grounds that revocation was mandatory. The trial court agreed and refused to review the underlying convictions. On appeal, the court found that there was no conflict between Va. Code § 2154(186) and Va. Code § 2154(187). The court held that Va. Code § 2154(186) gave mandatory direction to the director to revoke a license without a hearing after certain convictions, while Va. Code § 2154(187) gave the director the power to revoke based on proper evidence at a required hearing that the licensee had been guilty of the same offenses even without a conviction. The court further held that the trial court could not review earlier un-appealed judgments. The court rejected the argument that there was a contract created by the issuance of the driver’s license that prevented the Commonwealth from changing the required number of offenses from three to two. The court held that driving was a conditional privilege and was subject to the police power of the Commonwealth.
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.
Traffic Stop Lynchburg Virginia Lawyer
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.
Traffic Stop Virginia Beach Lawyer Drug Possession Illegal Search Evidence
Traffic Stop Virginia Beach Lawyer Drug Possession Illegal Search Evidence
Jason v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant sought review of his conviction by the Circuit Court for the City of Virginia Beach (Virginia) for possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute. Defendant challenged the admissibility of the marijuana and a statement he made to officers on the ground that the evidence was obtained in an illegal search and without the officers’ giving him Miranda warnings.
Traffic Stop Virginia Beach Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether defendant was in custody when he consented to the search and admitted ownership of the luggage?
Discussions:
Defendant was stopped for speeding. An officer asked if he could search the car. Defendant agreed verbally and signed a consent form. When a second officer asked about luggage in the trunk, defendant replied it was his. The officers found marijuana, arrested defendant, and gave him Miranda warning. On appeal of defendant’s conviction, the court found that defendant was not in custody when he consented to the search and admitted ownership of the luggage. Noting that the officer was justified in stopping defendant, the court concluded that the subsequent detainment and questioning did require Miranda warnings. With ample evidence to the contrary, the court rejected defendant’s claim that his consent to search was not voluntary. Because defendant had complete dominion and control over the marijuana found in the luggage, the court found that the evidence was sufficient to establish his constructive possession of the drugs. Affirming the conviction, the court held that the marijuana and defendant’s statement were properly admitted into evidence.
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.
DUI Prince William Virginia Lawyer
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.
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.
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.
Traffic Stop Prince William Virginia Lawyer Speed Drive
Traffic Stop Prince William Virginia Lawyer Speed Drive
James v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant was indicted by a Prince William County grand jury for reckless driving and for the felony failure to stop and provide certain information in violation of Code § 46.2-894. At a bench trial, the circuit court convicted the defendant of reckless driving and fixed his punishment at six months in jail. The circuit court convicted and fixed his punishment at two years imprisonment, which was suspended, and a fine of $ 1,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the circuit court. Appellant appealed.
Traffic Stop Prince William Virginia Lawyer
Issue:
- Whether the driver of a vehicle was involved in an accident within the intendment of Code § 46.2-894, a penal statute?
Discussion:
The court rejecting the court of appeals’ broad definition of “involved,” this court held that to be “involved” in an accident within the meaning of § 46.2-894, there had to be physical contact between appellant’s vehicle and another vehicle, person, or object, or appellant must have been the proximate cause of the accident. Applying this definition to appellant’s circumstances, the Supreme Court held that he was not involved in the accident within the meaning of § 46.2-894. His vehicle did not have any physical contact with the other driver’s vehicle. He was not a cause of the accident; rather, he reduced his speed, and ultimately allowed the other driver to enter into his lane. A law enforcement officer, who testified as an accident reconstruction expert, stated that the other driver had ample opportunity to slow down after merging into appellant’s lane before she lost control of her car, left the road, and collided into two different trees. She apparently did not slow down, however, and the accident resulted in her death and that of her four-year-old child. Hence the court of appeals’ judgment was reversed, and appellant’s conviction for violating § 46.2-894 was dismissed.
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
