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.
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.
Reckless Driving Virginia Perjury Insufficient Evidence Lawyers Fairfax County
Reckless Driving Virginia Perjury Insufficient Evidence Lawyers Fairfax County
Francis v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Defendant appealed from a judgment of the Circuit Court for the County of Fairfax (Virginia), which convicted him of perjury under Va. Code Ann. § 18-237 and imposed a fine.
Reckless Driving Virginia Perjury Insufficient Evidence Lawyers
Issue:
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict against the defendant?
Discussion:
Defendant was indicted for perjury based on the testimony that defendant gave in his own behalf during his trial on a warrant charging him with reckless driving. Specially, defendant had testified at his reckless driving trial that his car became uncontrollable when the steering mechanism broke. The Commonwealth brought perjury charges against defendant for such testimony, arguing that in fact there was nothing wrong with the car. Defendant was convicted of perjury. On appeal, defendant contended that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict.The court reversed the conviction, holding that the Commonwealth failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant knowingly and wilfully made any false statements of fact. Defendant’s alleged statement as to the cause of the car becoming uncontrollable, leaving the highway, and turning over was a mere expression of opinion, which, even if erroneous, did not constitute perjury. The court reversed the trial court’s judgment, set aside the verdict of the jury, and dismissed the prosecution.
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 Driver License Suspended Attorneys Louisa County
Reckless Driving Virginia Driver License Suspended Attorneys Louisa County
ANTONY MILL V. COMMONWEALTH
Facts:
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. 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. 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.
Reckless Driving Virginia Driver License Suspended Attorneys
Issue:
- Whether the language of the order, reasonably interpreted, accomplishes a suspension of defendant’s driver’s license?
- Whether the language of the document was confusing, contradictory and vague?
Discussion:
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.
8:00 AM – 12:00 AM Midnight
Former State Trooper
