Posted on February 07, 2023 in Criminal Defense

Towards the end of last month, a court of appeals in Virginia had to decide whether to reconsider a defendant’s guilty conviction for possession of methamphetamine. Originally, the defendant was charged and convicted after officers found drugs in the back of his truck; on appeal, he argued that the Commonwealth had not proven that he possessed ten grams of pure methamphetamine, which was required if the court was going to sentence him with as much time in prison as it did. Ultimately, the higher court agreed with the defendant and remanded the case for resentencing.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant was driving a blue pickup truck one evening when a police officer stopped him on the road. The defendant was carrying a motorcycle in the back of the truck, and the officer suspected the defendant might be stealing the motorcycle. The officer stopped the defendant, learned that the defendant did not have permission to take the motorcycle, and conducted an arrest.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 21, 2023 in Criminal Defense

In a recent case before a Virginia Court of Appeals, the defendant argued that the lower court had unfairly sentenced him after his third DUI conviction. According to the defendant, the court considered the defendant’s previous two DUI offenses as evidence when deciding his sentence, and they were only technically allowed to consider one of the offenses in question. Ultimately, the higher court disagreed, and the original sentence was kept in place.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant in this case was first convicted of driving under the influence in early 2020. He was convicted for a second DUI offense in the summer of 2021, and he was convicted for a third DUI offense in late 2020. When the defendant was pulled over for the third DUI, the officer conducted a blood test and found that the defendant’s blood alcohol was .405%, well above the Commonwealth’s legal limit.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 11, 2023 in Criminal Defense

In a recent case before a court of appeals in Virginia, the defendant argued that the judge in the lower court unfairly sentenced her after she violated the terms of her probation. On appeal, the court looked at the evidence and agreed that the court imposed an excess sentence, and that the case should be remanded so that the defendant would have another chance to argue her case before a trial court judge.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant in this case was convicted on several controlled substance charges, and she was sentenced to several years in prison as a result. The sentencing court, however, suspended part of her sentence because the defendant agreed to comply with the terms of her probation. These rules included the stipulation that the defendant had to follow all rules set by her probation officer. She also had to remain drug free for the entire term of her probation.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 28, 2022 in Criminal Defense

Earlier this month, a circuit court in Virginia ruled on a defendant’s appeal of his rape conviction. Originally, the defendant was charged and convicted after he allegedly showed up as his ex-girlfriend’s house and had non-consensual sex with her. On appeal, the defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his guilty conviction, and he asked the higher court to reverse the verdict. The higher court, however, ultimately disagreed with the defendant and sustained his original conviction.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant in this case showed up at his ex-girlfriend’s home one evening, with whom he had been in an “on again, off again” relationship. The ex-girlfriend answered the door and said that she was very tired, that she had fainted earlier in the day, and that she just wanted to go to bed. She explicitly told the defendant she did not want to have sex, but she let him inside to lie in bed with her while she fell asleep.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 20, 2022 in Criminal Defense

Recently, a circuit court in Virginia ruled on the Commonwealth of Virginia’s appeal in a sex abuse case. The defendant had been charged with having sexual intercourse with a child, and the trial court had made the decision to suppress certain statements the defendant made to officers investigating the crime. On appeal, the Commonwealth argued that the statements should not have been suppressed, since the defendant had made the statements voluntarily. Agreeing with the Commonwealth, the higher court reversed the trial court’s decision.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant in this case was brought into the police station because officers suspected him of abusing his role as a child custodian and having sex with a minor. The officers had not charged the defendant with any crime, but they wanted to speak with him to figure out if he was a legitimate suspect.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 11, 2022 in Criminal Defense

In a recent drug case before a Virginia court of appeals, the Commonwealth appealed a lower court’s ruling in the defendant’s favor. Originally, the defendant in this case was charged with illegal drug possession. He successfully argued that his incriminating statements he made to police officers should be suppressed at trial, but the Commonwealth challenged this lower court’s ruling. The higher court ended up agreeing with the Commonwealth and reversing the original ruling.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, two officers were on patrol one evening when they pulled the defendant over in a standard traffic stop. The defendant told the officers they were free to search the car, and the officers found a bag of white powder on one of the vehicle’s floorboards.

One of the officers began to conduct an arrest. When asked what was in the bag, the defendant readily admitted that it was “probably cocaine.” He also freely stated that he had a tool for smoking weed in his pocket. The officers put the defendant in their patrol car, gave him the required Miranda warnings, and asked again what was in the bag. The defendant admitted for a second time that the substance was cocaine.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 30, 2022 in Criminal Defense

Earlier this month, a circuit court in Virginia was faced with the decision of whether to grant a defendant’s appeal in a case involving marijuana and firearm possession. In his appeal, the defendant argued that because of his constitutional right to privacy, the court should have suppressed incriminating evidence that officers found when searching his home. The higher court reviewed the facts of the case and ultimately denied the defendant’s appeal, upholding the original guilty verdict.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, two officers came to the defendant’s apartment one afternoon because a neighbor had called 911, reporting disorderly conduct. As soon as the officers stepped out of their car, they smelled marijuana, and they approached the defendant’s door to investigate the odor as well as the possible disorderly conduct.

When the defendant answered the door, he told the officers they could not come in without a search warrant. The officers told the defendant that he had two options: he could let them inside, or he could wait on the porch in handcuffs while they went to get a proper warrant. The defendant conceded that he had been smoking marijuana, and the officers immediately entered the apartment.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 22, 2022 in Criminal Defense

Earlier this month, a Virginia court of appeals denied a defendant’s request to overturn his DUI conviction. Originally, the defendant was charged with and convicted of driving under the influence, and he was sentenced to twelve months in jail as a result. On appeal, one of the defendant’s arguments was that the officer that pulled him over did not have the legal authority to conduct the traffic stop, and thus that the evidence the officer obtained should have been suppressed at trial. Ultimately, the court of appeals disagreed with the defendant and denied the appeal.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, a state trooper was patrolling one afternoon when he noticed the defendant, driving with an expired vehicle registration on the back of his car. The officer proceeded to conduct a traffic stop, pulling the defendant over on the side of the road.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 28, 2022 in Criminal Defense

Recently, a court of appeals in Virginia was faced with the decision of whether or not to remove a defendant’s name and identifying information from the Virginia Sex Offender Registry. Originally, the lower court had denied the defendant’s petition in 2021, deciding that his information would have to remain on the public registry. On appeal, the higher court agreed, ultimately keeping the defendant’s name on the list.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant pled guilty in 2001 to two counts of “crimes against nature.” While the opinion did not disclose the exact crimes the defendant committed, it did discuss the consequences that were involved. The two offenses happened on the same day, and the convictions forced the defendant to register on the Virginia Sex Offender Registry. The defendant complied with the requirements necessary under the registry, and he continued updating his information yearly through 2021.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 26, 2022 in Criminal Defense

Recently, an appellate court in Fairfax County determined that the trial judge incorrectly allowed a trial to proceed in a criminal defendant’s drug case. Because the lower court improperly allowed the defendant’s case to move forward, the defendant was entitled to a reversal. The court then vacated the defendant’s conviction.

Facts of the Case

According to the opinion, the defendant in this case was charged with two counts of possessing a controlled substance with intent to distribute, what courts often abbreviate as “PWID.” Going into the trial, the Commonwealth argued that the defendant was convicted of a similar offense twice before; thus, because this was his third PWID offense, he should be subject to significant time in prison.

At trial, however, the defendant argued that the Commonwealth’s evidence proving that he was convicted of two previous PWID offenses was insufficient. The documents were not authenticated and showed inconsistent information. The court agreed with the defendant and allowed him to strike the evidence from the record.

Continue Reading ››