Copeland v. Commonwealth, 664 S.E.2d 528 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 664 S.E.2d 528 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
183 citation events (183 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: John B. Russell, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (vactapp, 2024-01-30)
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2009 2017 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 46 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) John B. Russell, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 (2008) (recognizing that this Court has no obligation to accept parties’ concessions of law).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Michael Haas v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 (2008).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gary Linwood Bush v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
We find this principle especially important when evaluating petitions for actual innocence, “given the need to ensure that the writ of actual innocence does not evolve into an omnibus substitute for the carefully crafted procedures of the habeas corpus writ, Code § 8.01-654, et seq., or impinge upon the Governor’s exclusive power over executive clemency, Code § 53.1-229, et seq.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 532 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 530 (2008).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Juan Amarndo Candelaria v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
Clay v. Commonwealth, 262 Va. 253, 260 , 546 S.E.2d 728, 731-32 (2001) (quoting Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 764-65 (1946)). 3 Although we are generally precluded from accepting concessions of law made on appeal, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we note the Commonwealth conceded the circuit court erred by admitting these statements. -6- Whether . . . an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re: Watford
Va. · 2018 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Montgomery v. Commonwealth, 62 Va. App. 656, 676-77 , 751 S.E.2d 692, 701-02 (2013) (granting writ of actual innocence where the petitioner established that his conviction resulted from perjury committed by the complaining witness, thereby establishing that the record lacked evidence of his guilt); Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529-30 (2008) (granting a writ of actual innocence when post-conviction scientific analysis of the evidence established that a required element could not have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Terrell Dewayne Garnett v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
Furthermore, the Commonwealth introduced evidence that at the time of the arrest, appellant was the only person in the car, and Madeline detected a 3 “We have no obligation to accept concessions of error.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citing United States v. Hairston, 522 F.3d 336, 340 (4th Cir. 2008) (recognizing “the government’s concession of error is not binding on this court”)). -7- strong odor of marijuana when she approached the car.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Victoria Elizabeth Dufresne v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
While we are not bound by a party’s concessions of law, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 532 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 530 (2008), we nevertheless agree with the Commonwealth’s concession. - 11 - [d]efinitionally, theft is an essential component of robbery and charged as such in every robbery indictment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Steven Cornelius Rogers v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
But if one cannot say, with fair assurance, after pondering all that happened without stripping the erroneous action from the whole, that the judgment was not substantially swayed by the error, it is impossible to conclude that 6 While we acknowledge that unpublished decisions have no precedential value, we cite Martin here as an informative decision pursuant to Rule 5A:1(f). 7 Although we are generally precluded from accepting concessions of law made on appeal, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we agree with the Commonwealth’s concession bas…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Victoria Elizabeth Dufresne v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
While we are not bound by a party’s concessions of law, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 532 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 530 (2008), we nevertheless agree with the Commonwealth’s concession. - 11 - [d]efinitionally, theft is an essential component of robbery and charged as such in every robbery indictment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Victoria Elizabeth Dufresne v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
While we are not bound by a party’s concessions of law, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 532 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 530 (2008), we nevertheless agree with the Commonwealth’s concession. - 11 - [d]efinitionally, theft is an essential component of robbery and charged as such in every robbery indictment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jason Merritt Overbey v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2×)
Va. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Although we are not obligated to accept the Commonwealth’s concession of this mixed issue of law and fact, see Commonwealth v. Hilliard, 270 Va. 42, 49 , 613 S.E.2d 579, 584 (2005); Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531, 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we agree, based on our review of the record, that appellant properly invoked his right to counsel. 5 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Geoffrey Narcisco Rivera v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2×)
Va. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Although we are generally precluded from accepting concessions of law made on appeal, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531-32, 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we agree with the Commonwealth’s concessions based on our independent review of the record. 4 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert Jeffrey Kobman v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
“While we are not obliged to accept the Commonwealth’s concession of legal error, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we agree with the Commonwealth in this case.... ” Grant v. Commonwealth, 54 Va.App. 714, 720 , 682 S.E.2d 84, 87 (2009).
examined Cited as authority (rule) George Lee Hawkins v. Commonwealth of Virginia (4×)
Va. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
We conclude that Hawkins’s non-verbal response to Mazzio’s request invited the officers to lift his shirt.5 Like an appellant who places his or her hands on a wall in response to an 4 Although we are generally precluded from accepting concessions of law made on appeal, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we agree with Hawkins’s concession based on our independent review of the record. 5 The Fourth Circuit reached a similar conclusion based on comparable conduct in United States v. Wilson, 895 F.2d 168 (4th Cir. 1990).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Richard Andrew Jenkins v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2014 · confidence medium
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citing United States v. Hairston, 522 F.3d 336, 340 (4th Cir. 2008) (recognizing that “the government’s concession of error is not binding on this court”), and Logan v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. App. 168, 172 , 622 S.E.2d 771, 773 (2005) (en banc)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Herbert W. Lux, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Although this Court “ha[s] no obligation to accept concessions of error,” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), following a review of the trial court record, we agree with the Commonwealth that appellant’s conviction of obstruction of justice was not established by the evidence presented at trial.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Herbert W. Lux, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Although this Court “ha[s] no obligation to accept concessions of error,” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), following a review of the trial court record, we agree with the Commonwealth that appellant’s conviction of obstruction of justice was not established by the evidence presented at trial.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Earl Bradley, s/k/a Earl Lewis Bradley v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Id. at 531-32, 664 S.E.2d at 529 (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) William James Bowers, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2×)
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Richie D. Wells, s/k/a Richie D. Wells v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Michael H. St. Clair v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kristina G. Price v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Paul A. Maroon v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) John W. Brown v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Michael J. Klebak v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mark Darrel Osenbaugh v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Edward J. Lemmon v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ronald Lee Moore v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Arnold E. Meadows, s/k/a Arnold E. Meadows, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matthew Thomas Bennett v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Carl Jay Klein v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Scott M. Lafountaine v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Paul E. Warren v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
However, “[w]e have no obligation to accept concessions of error, and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Terra Nyree Hines v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2×)
Va. Ct. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
Virginia courts, of course, “have no obligation to accept concessions of error” and can never be bound by a concession on a “pure question of law.” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (citing United States v. Hairston, 522 F.3d 336, 340 (4th Cir.2008) (recognizing “the government’s concession of error is not binding on this court”), and Logan v. Commonwealth, 47 Va.App. 168, 172 , 622 S.E.2d 771, 773 (2005) (en banc)).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Thomas Haynesworth v. Commonwealth of Virginia (6×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
Va. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
The only time this Court has considered and accepted an Attorney General’s confession of error in the context of the writ of actual innocence statutes was in Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 532 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 530 (2008), but the facts in that case are in no way analogous to those in these cases.
examined Cited as authority (rule) Thomas Haynesworth v. Commonwealth of Virginia (13×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
Va. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
The only time this Court has considered and accepted an Attorney General’s confession of error in the context of the writ of actual innocence statutes was in Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 532, 664 S.E.2d 528, 530 (2008), but the facts in that case are in no way analogous to those in these cases.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Timothy Shawn Daugherty v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Copeland, 52 Va. App. at 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d at 529 (footnote omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Murphy v. Charlotte County Department of Social Services
Va. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Because the law applies to all alike, it cannot be subordinated to the private opinions of litigants.’ ” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (quoting Logan v. Commonwealth, 47 Va.App. 168, 172 , 622 S.E.2d 771, 773 (2005) (en banc)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rena Suzanne Williams v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Because the law applies to all alike, it cannot be subordinated to the private opinions of litigants.’” Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008) (quoting Logan v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. App. 168, 172 , 622 S.E.2d 771, 773 (2005) (en banc)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Eric Amir Ghameshlouy, s/k/a Eric Amir Ghmaesouly v. City of Virginia Beach
Va. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008). -5-
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Grant v. Commonwealth
Va. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
While we are not obliged to accept the Commonwealth’s concession of legal error, see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529, 531 , 664 S.E.2d 528, 529 (2008), we agree with the Commonwealth in this case: the attestation clause is testimonial under the holding of Melendez-Diaz, 4 and Grant complied with the requirements of Code § 19.2-187.1.
cited Cited "see" Tony James Woodley v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
While such concessions are entitled to great weight, they do not remove the Court’s obligation to conduct its own review.” Id.; see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531-32 (2008).
discussed Cited "see" Jason Edward Via v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 531 (2008); Merritt v. Commonwealth, 69 26 The fact that Ford only informed appellant of the latter purpose, and leveled no accusation against appellant directly, is immaterial in assessing whether the facts support appellant’s conviction.
cited Cited "see" Dontay Milsap v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
While such concessions are entitled to great weight, they do not remove the Court’s obligation to conduct its own review.” Id.; see Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529 , 531-32 & n.3 (2008).
cited Cited "see" Linda Mena Arreola, s/k/a Linda Mena-Arreola v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Va. Ct. App. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va. App. 529, 532 (2008) (this Court is under no obligation to accept concessions of law on appeal).
discussed Cited "see" Isiah David Joseph v. Commonwealth of Virginia (2×)
Va. Ct. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Copeland v. Commonwealth, 52 Va.App. 529 , 531-32 & n. 3, 664 S.E.2d 528 , 529 & n. 3 (2008).
Darrell Andrew COPELAND, Petitioner,
v.
COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, Respondent
1547081.
Court of Appeals of Virginia.
Aug 12, 2008.
664 S.E.2d 528
Kelsey, Petty, Bumgardner.
Cited by 58 opinions  |  Published

Upon a Petition for a Writ of Actual Innocence

The Circuit Court for the City of Chesapeake convicted Darrell Andrew Copeland of possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony, a violation of Code § 18.2-308.2(A). See Conviction Order, Case No. CR07-949 (May 2, 2007);[*531] Sentencing Order, Case No. CR07-949 (August 7, 2007). At the time of trial, the putative firearm was in the possession of the Virginia Department of Forensic Science. After Copeland’s conviction became final, DFS issued a certificate of analysis which, both Copeland and the Commonwealth agree, made factual findings that excluded the item tested from the statutory definition of “firearm” under Code § 18.2-308.2(A). See Morris v. Commonwealth, 269 Va. 127, 131, 607 S.E.2d 110, 112 (2005) (defining “firearm” under Code § 18.2-308.2 to include only weapons “designed, made, and intended to expel a projectile by means of an explosion”). [1]

Based upon the after-discovered DFS certificate of analysis, Copeland filed a petition for actual innocence under Code § 19.2-327.10, et seq. To succeed, Copeland must prove by clear and convincing evidence that, among other things, the after-discovered information was “previously unknown or unavailable to the petitioner or his trial attorney of record at the time the conviction became final in the circuit court,” Code § 19.2-327.11(A)(iv), and that neither he nor his trial counsel could have discovered this information “by the exercise of diligence,” Code § 19.2-327.11(A)(vi). [2] After conducting his own evaluation of the facts, the Attorney General concedes Copeland has met his burden of proof and affirmatively joins in Copeland’s request for relief.

We have no obligation to accept concessions of error, see United States v. Hairston, 522 F.3d 336, 340 (4th Cir.2008) (recognizing “the government’s concession of error is not binding on this court”), and, to be sure, we would never do so if the issue were a pure question of law, Logan v. Commonwealth, 47 Va.App. 168, 172, 622 S.E.2d 771, 773 (2005) (en banc). “Our fidelity to the uniform application of law pre[*532] eludes us from accepting concessions of law made on appeal. Because the law applies to all alike, it cannot be subordinated to the private opinions of litigants.” Id. 3 Such hesitation is particularly appropriate here given the need to ensure that the writ of actual innocence does not evolve into an omnibus substitute for the carefully crafted procedures of the habeas corpus writ, Code § 8.01-654, et seq., or impinge upon the Governor’s exclusive power over executive clemency, Code § 53.1-229, et seq.

Having independently examined the record presented to us, we conclude the unique circumstances of this case make it prudent to accept the Attorney General’s concession without “further development of the facts” under Code § 19.2-327.12. Accordingly, we grant the requested writ of actual innocence and vacate Copeland’s conviction for possessing a firearm after having been convicted of a felony in violation of Code § 18.2-308.2(A). We further remand this matter to the circuit court with instructions to enter an order of expungement pursuant to Code § 19.2-327.13. [4]

Writ granted, conviction vacated, and case remanded.

1

. See also Kingsbur v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. 348, 351, 593 S.E.2d 208, 209-10 (2004); Armstrong v. Commonwealth, 263 Va. 573, 583-84, 562 S.E.2d 139, 145 (2002).

2

. See generally Carpitcher v. Commonwealth, 273 Va. 335, 641 S.E.2d 486 (2007); In re Johnson, 47 Va.App. 503, 624 S.E.2d 696 (2006), aff'd, Johnson v. Commonwealth, 273 Va. 315, 641 S.E.2d 480 (2007).

3

. We analogize the Attorney General’s position in this case to a confession of error sometimes submitted on direct appellate review. In such cases, as here, the "public trust reposed in the law enforcement officers of the Government requires that they be quick to confess error when, in their opinion, a miscarriage of justice may result from their remaining silent.” Young v. United States, 315 U.S. 257, 258, 62 S.Ct. 510, 511, 86 L.Ed. 832 (1942). Even so, "such a confession does not relieve this Court of the performance of the judicial function. The considered judgment of the law enforcement officers that reversible error has been committed is entitled to great weight, but our judicial obligations compel us to examine independently the errors confessed.” Id. at 258-59, 62 S.Ct. at 511; see also Gibson v. United States, 329 U.S. 338, 344 n. 9, 67 S.Ct. 301, 304 n. 9, 91 L.Ed. 331 (1946).

4

. We direct the Clerk to publish this order in the Reports of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.