Smith v. Commonwealth (1977)
green
· 26 citation events
across 2 courts.
Showing the 9 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197820022026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Zayon Lamont Everett v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2025)
For evidence to sufficiently corroborate accomplice testimony, it must “connect[] the defendant to the crime and corroborate[] the defendant’s ‘occasion and opportunity for the crime,’” and be “sufficient to warrant the jury in crediting the truth of the accomplice’s testimony.” Id. (first quoting Holmes, 76 Va. App. at 57; and then quoting Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 (1977) (per curiam)).
per curiam
green
Javon Martay Pegram v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2025)
For evidence to sufficiently corroborate accomplice testimony, it must “connect[] the defendant to the crime and corroborate[] the defendant’s ‘occasion and opportunity for the crime’” and be “sufficient to warrant the jury in crediting the truth of the accomplice’s testimony.” Id. (first quoting Holmes, 76 Va. App. at 57; and then quoting Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 (1977) (per curiam)).
per curiam
green
Juhwaan Barnes v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2024)
The evidence is sufficiently corroborating when it connects the defendant to the crime and corroborates the defendant’s -8- “occasion and opportunity for the crime,” Holmes, 76 Va. App. at 57 (quoting Dillard, 216 Va. at 823 ), and when it is “sufficient to warrant the jury in crediting the truth of the accomplice’s testimony,” Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 (1977) (per curiam) (quoting Dillard, 216 Va. at 823 ).
per curiam
green
Priscilla Ann Holmes v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2022)
See Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 (1977) (“[T]he accomplice’s testimony was not sufficiently corroborated, and it was error to refuse a cautionary instruction.
“[T]he accomplice’s testimony was not sufficiently corroborated, and it was error to refuse a cautionary instruction. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court will be reversed, and the case will be remanded for a new trial.”
green
Priscilla Ann Holmes v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2022)
See Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 (1977) (“[T]he accomplice’s testimony was not sufficiently corroborated, and it was error to refuse a cautionary instruction.
“[T]he accomplice’s testimony was not sufficiently corroborated, and it was error to refuse a cautionary instruction. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court will be reversed, and the case will be remanded for a new trial.”
green
Shavis Donta Holloman v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2015)
A cautionary instruction may be refused where other evidence corroborates “ ‘material facts which tend to connect the accused with the crime.’ ” Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 , 237 S.E.2d 776, 777 (1977) (quoting Dillard, 216 Va. at 823 , 224 S.E.2d at 140 ).
quoting Dillard, 216 Va. at 823 , 224 S.E.2d at 140
green
Hedrick v. Warden of Sussex I State Prison (2002)
If it is, the instruction should be granted; if it is not lacking, the instruction should be refused. . . .” Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 456 , 237 S.E.2d 776, 111 (1977) (quoting Dillard v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 820, 822 , 224 S.E.2d 137, 139 (1976)).
quoting Dillard v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 820, 822 , 224 S.E.2d 137, 139 (1976)
green
Ward v. Commonwealth (1979)
Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455, 457 , 237 S.E.2d 776, 777 (1977).
green
Allard v. Commonwealth (1978)
See Crosby v. Common wealth, 132 Va. 518 , 110 S.E. 270 (1922). and Russell v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 833 , 223 S.E.2d 877 (1976). *993 In Smith v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 455 , 237 S.E.2d 776 (1977) we held it error for a cautionary instruction to have been refused.