A. Defense motions or objections seeking (i) suppression of evidence on the grounds such evidence was obtained in violation of the provisions of the Fourth, Fifth or Sixth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States or Article I, Section 8, 10 or 11 of the Constitution of Virginia proscribing illegal searches and seizures and protecting rights against self-incrimination; (ii) dismissal of a warrant, information, or indictment or any count or charge thereof on the ground that: (a) the defendant would be deprived of a speedy trial in violation of the provisions of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of Virginia, or § 19.2-243; or (b) the defendant would be twice placed in jeopardy in violation of the provisions of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of Virginia; or (iii) dismissal of a warrant, information, or indictment or any count or charge thereof on the ground that a statute upon which it was based is unconstitutional shall be raised by motion or objection.
B. Such a motion or objection in a proceeding in circuit court shall be raised in writing, before trial. The motions or objections shall be filed and notice given to opposing counsel not later than seven days before trial in circuit court or, if made under clause (ii) of subsection A, at such time prior to trial in circuit court as the grounds for the motion or objection shall arise, whichever occurs last. A hearing on all such motions or objections shall be held not later than three days prior to trial in circuit court, unless such period is waived by the accused, as set by the trial judge. The circuit court may, however, for good cause shown and in the interest of justice, permit the motions or objections to be raised at a later time.
C. To assist the defense in filing such motions or objections in a timely manner, the circuit court shall, upon motion of the defendant, direct the Commonwealth to file a bill of particulars pursuant to § 19.2-230. The circuit court shall fix the time within which such bill of particulars is to be filed. Upon further motion of the defendant, the circuit court may, upon a showing of good cause, direct the Commonwealth to supplement its bill of particulars. The attorney for the Commonwealth shall certify that the matters stated in the bill of particulars are true and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief.
D. In a criminal proceeding in district court, any motion or objection as described in subsection A may be raised prior to or at such proceeding. In the event such a motion or objection is raised, the district court shall, upon motion of the Commonwealth grant a continuance for good cause shown.
1987, c. 710; 2005, cc. 622, 694; 2006, cc. 578, 862.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
98
cases (
30 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case:
Arrington v. Commonwealth, 674 S.E.2d 554 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
Arrington v. Commonwealth, 674 S.E.2d 554 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 34× “Because Arrington failed to challenge the admissibility of the evidence obtained in the seizure, he is procedurally barred from raising this issue pursuant to Code § 19.2-266.2 and Rule 5A:18. I. BACKGROUND 1 On appeal, we review the evidence in the “light most favorable” to the…”
Kelly Daniel Bass v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 829 S.E.2d 554 (Va. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 18× “The Commonwealth makes several arguments in response to Bass’s contention, including that the trial court did not err in denying Bass’s post-trial motion because the motion was untimely under Code § 19.2-266.2 and Rule 3A:9. Code § 19.”
Williams v. Commonwealth, 706 S.E.2d 530 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 18× “Code § 19.2-266.2 provides *768 A. Defense motions or objections seeking .”
Jones v. Commonwealth, 795 S.E.2d 705 (Va. 2017).
· cites it 6× “2d 583 , 585 (2003) (finding appellant's Fourth Amendment argument "barred from consideration on appeal under Rule 5:25" because appellant "present[ed] this argument for the first time on appeal"); see also Code § 19.2-266.2(A)-(B) (providing that a defendant waives his right to…”
Charlene Lanette Gregory v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 764 S.E.2d 732 (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 13× “Nowhere in appellant’s “Motion, Memorandum and Notice to Suppress Pursuant to Va.Code § 19.2-266.2” did appellant ever refer to Miranda or even to “custodial interrogation.”
Weeks v. Angelone, 4 F. Supp. 2d 497 (E.D. Va. 1998).
· cites it 20× “Weeks makes two distinct arguments supporting his claim: (1) that the mandatory nature of Va.Code § 19.2-266.2 creates a liberty interest in receiving a Bill of Particulars, the denial of which violated his due process rights under the federal Constitution; and (2) the Sixth…”
Upchurch v. Commonwealth, 521 S.E.2d 290 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 14× “” Upchurch concedes that his motion was essentially a motion to suppress the evidence but contends that the trial court erred when it denied his motion based on his failure to comply with the requirements of Code § 19.2-266.2. We hold that the trial judge did not err in refusing…”
Schmitt v. True, 387 F. Supp. 2d 622 (E.D. Va. 2005).
· cites it 25× “Both Cooley and Collins knew that, under Va.Code § 19.2-266.2, motions to suppress on constitutional grounds had to be filed before trial.”
Johnson v. Commonwealth, 561 S.E.2d 1 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “This argument was not preserved for consideration on appeal.”
Magruder v. Com., 657 S.E.2d 113 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 4× “Pursuant to Code § 19.2-266.2, an accused must file a written motion to suppress evidence allegedly obtained in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments no later that seven days before trial.”
Schmitt v. Commonwealth, 547 S.E.2d 186 (Va. 2000).
· cites it 4× “In response, the Commonwealth asserts that Schmitt’s failure to comply with the notice requirements of Code § 19.2-266.2 in the trial court bars consideration of this issue on appeal.”
McGhee v. Com., 701 S.E.2d 58 (Va. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Based upon McGhee's threats, Officer Dalton could not know whether there was a firearm in the passenger compartment accessible to the passenger.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(A) — 14 cases
Jones v. Commonwealth, 795 S.E.2d 705 (Va. 2017).
“2d 583 , 585 (2003) (finding appellant's Fourth Amendment argument "barred from consideration on appeal under Rule 5:25" because appellant "present[ed] this argument for the first time on appeal"); see also Code § 19.2-266.2(A)-(B) (providing that a defendant waives his right to…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(A)(i) — 3 cases
Arrington v. Commonwealth, 674 S.E.2d 554 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“Because Arrington failed to challenge the admissibility of the evidence obtained in the seizure, he is procedurally barred from raising this issue pursuant to Code § 19.2-266.2 and Rule 5A:18. I. BACKGROUND 1 On appeal, we review the evidence in the “light most favorable” to the…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(A)(ii) — 2 cases
Kelly Daniel Bass v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 829 S.E.2d 554 (Va. Ct. App. 2019).
“The Commonwealth makes several arguments in response to Bass’s contention, including that the trial court did not err in denying Bass’s post-trial motion because the motion was untimely under Code § 19.2-266.2 and Rule 3A:9. Code § 19.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(A)(ii)(b) — 2 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(A)(iii) — 2 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(B) — 24 cases
Arrington v. Commonwealth, 674 S.E.2d 554 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“Because Arrington failed to challenge the admissibility of the evidence obtained in the seizure, he is procedurally barred from raising this issue pursuant to Code § 19.2-266.2 and Rule 5A:18. I. BACKGROUND 1 On appeal, we review the evidence in the “light most favorable” to the…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(C) — 4 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-266.2(ii) — 2 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.