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.
7 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1979–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by West 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Jeffersgreen2 sentences2019Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979) (“Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.”). 25 Chaffin, 156 W. 2012We have held that, “[w]here a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” Syl., State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979). | 1 | 6 |
State v. Chaffingreen2 sentences2019Va. at 268 , 192 S.E.2d at 731 (“Proof as to time is not material where no statute of limitations is involved.”)(citing State v. Trippe, 24 S.E.2d 340 (N.C. 1943). 2019Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979) (“Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.”). 25 Chaffin, 156 W. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Harlowgreen1 sentence1979See, State v. Harlow, 137 W. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in West Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. England
green
2 sentences1990In syllabus point 3 of State v. England, 180 W.Va. 342 , 376 S.E.2d 548 (1988), we stated: ‘Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.’ Syllabus, State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979). 1990In syllabus point 3 of State v. England, 180 W.Va. 342 , 376 S.E.2d 548 (1988), we stated: ‘Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.’ Syllabus, State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979). | 2 | 1989–1990 |
State v. . Trippe
green
1 sentence2019Va. at 268 , 192 S.E.2d at 731 (“Proof as to time is not material where no statute of limitations is involved.”)(citing State v. Trippe, 24 S.E.2d 340 (N.C. 1943). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Houdeyshell
green
2 sentences1988Consequently, the instruction violates the Syllabus of State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979): “Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” 3 See also State v. Houdeyshell, 174 W.Va. 688 , 329 S.E.2d 53 (1985). 1988Consequently, the instruction violates the Syllabus of State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1979): “Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” 3 See also State v. Houdeyshell, 174 W.Va. 688 , 329 S.E.2d 53 (1985). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Brady
green
2 sentences1986In the syllabus of State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1981), we said: “Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” In State v. Morrison, 207 N.C. 804 , 178 S.E. 562 (1935) and State v. Brady, 237 N.C. 675 , 75 S.E.2d 791 (1953), the Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed convictions of receiving stolen property where the trial court failed to instruct 1986In the syllabus of State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1981), we said: “Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” In State v. Morrison, 207 N.C. 804 , 178 S.E. 562 (1935) and State v. Brady, 237 N.C. 675 , 75 S.E.2d 791 (1953), the Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed convictions of receiving stolen property where the trial court failed to instruct | 1 | 1986–1986 |
State v. . Morrison
neutral
2 sentences1986In the syllabus of State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1981), we said: “Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” In State v. Morrison, 207 N.C. 804 , 178 S.E. 562 (1935) and State v. Brady, 237 N.C. 675 , 75 S.E.2d 791 (1953), the Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed convictions of receiving stolen property where the trial court failed to instruct 1986In the syllabus of State v. Jeffers, 162 W.Va. 532 , 251 S.E.2d 227 (1981), we said: “Where a trial court gives, over objection, an instruction which incompletely states the law, and the defect is not corrected by a later instruction, the giving of such incomplete instruction constitutes reversible error where the omission involves an element of the crime.” In State v. Morrison, 207 N.C. 804 , 178 S.E. 562 (1935) and State v. Brady, 237 N.C. 675 , 75 S.E.2d 791 (1953), the Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed convictions of receiving stolen property where the trial court failed to instruct | 1 | 1986–1986 |