Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1990–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cooper v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences1992We conclude that the trial judge did not commit reversible error. “ ‘The purpose of an instruction is to furnish guidance to the jury in their deliberations, and to aid them in arriving at a proper verdict, so far as it is competent for the court to assist them.’ ” Cooper v. *346 Commonwealth, 2 Va. App. 497, 500 , 345 S.E.2d 775, 777 (1986) (quoting 75 Am. 1992We conclude that the trial judge did not commit reversible error. “ ‘The purpose of an instruction is to furnish guidance to the jury in their deliberations, and to aid them in arriving at a proper verdict, so far as it is competent for the court to assist them.’ ” Cooper v. *346 Commonwealth, 2 Va. App. 497, 500 , 345 S.E.2d 775, 777 (1986) (quoting 75 Am. | 2 | 2 |
Breeden v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2014See Breeden v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 297, 300 , 227 S.E.2d 734, 736-37 (1976) (holding that a criminal defendant cannot be forced to use peremptory strikes on jurors who should have been stricken for cause). 2014See Breeden v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 297, 300 , 227 S.E.2d 734, 736-37 (1976) (holding that a criminal defendant cannot be forced to use peremptory strikes on jurors who should have been stricken for cause). | 1 | 1 |
Beck v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2005NOTES [1] A 2004 amendment to this statute substituted "Whether by trial or upon a plea of guilty" for "In cases of trial by jury or by the court." [2] In Beck v. Commonwealth, 253 Va. 373, 384 , 484 S.E.2d 898, 905 (1997), the Supreme Court observed that "[t]he clear import of the [Crime Victim and Witness Rights] Act is to preserve the right of victims of crimes to have the impact of those crimes upon their lives considered as part of the sentencing process, if that is their wish...." [3] On appeal, Rock did not contend that the victim impact testimony was outside the procedural boundaries a 2005NOTES [1] A 2004 amendment to this statute substituted "Whether by trial or upon a plea of guilty" for "In cases of trial by jury or by the court." [2] In Beck v. Commonwealth, 253 Va. 373, 384 , 484 S.E.2d 898, 905 (1997), the Supreme Court observed that "[t]he clear import of the [Crime Victim and Witness Rights] Act is to preserve the right of victims of crimes to have the impact of those crimes upon their lives considered as part of the sentencing process, if that is their wish...." [3] On appeal, Rock did not contend that the victim impact testimony was outside the procedural boundaries a | 1 | 1 |
Gilchrist v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2002The lack of opportunity to determine whether proof could be mustered to counter the prosecutor’s intended use of the evidence deprived Smoot of “the right ‘to call for evidence in his favor,’ including ‘the right to prepare for trial ... and to ascertain the truth.’ ” Gilchrist v. Commonwealth, 227 Va. 540, 547 , 317 S.E.2d 784, 788 (1984). 2002The lack of opportunity to determine whether proof could be mustered to counter the prosecutor’s intended use of the evidence deprived Smoot of “the right ‘to call for evidence in his favor,’ including ‘the right to prepare for trial ... and to ascertain the truth.’ ” Gilchrist v. Commonwealth, 227 Va. 540, 547 , 317 S.E.2d 784, 788 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bazemore v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2018The Court in Bazemore did not specifically hold that it was error to refuse this instruction; instead, the Court held that “[w]hether or not the trial judge committed reversible error by refusing [the instruction at issue], he did so by giving another instruction.” Bazemore, 210 Va. at 352 , 170 S.E.2d at 776 . 2018The Court in Bazemore did not specifically hold that it was error to refuse this instruction; instead, the Court held that “[w]hether or not the trial judge committed reversible error by refusing [the instruction at issue], he did so by giving another instruction.” Bazemore, 210 Va. at 352 , 170 S.E.2d at 776 . | 2 | 2018–2018 |
United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez
green
2 sentences2014Huguely argues that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 , 126 S.Ct. 2557 , 165 L.Ed.2d 409 (2006), requires that this Court grant him a new trial. 1. 2014Huguely argues that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 , 126 S.Ct. 2557 , 165 L.Ed.2d 409 (2006), requires that this Court grant him a new trial. 1. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Lilly v. Virginia
green
2 sentences2000In its brief on this rehearing en banc, the Commonwealth concedes that the trial judge’s admission of Harris’ confession was error, see Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116, 139 , 119 S.Ct. 1887, 1901 , 144 L.Ed.2d 117 (1999) (holding that “[t]he admission of the untested confession of [a codefendant] violated petitioner’s Confrontation Clause rights”), and that the judge also erred in refusing to permit Williams’ counsel to see the confession before the judge ruled on its admissibility. 2000In its brief on this rehearing en banc, the Commonwealth concedes that the trial judge’s admission of Harris’ confession was error, see Lilly v. Virginia, 527 U.S. 116, 139 , 119 S.Ct. 1887, 1901 , 144 L.Ed.2d 117 (1999) (holding that “[t]he admission of the untested confession of [a codefendant] violated petitioner’s Confrontation Clause rights”), and that the judge also erred in refusing to permit Williams’ counsel to see the confession before the judge ruled on its admissibility. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.