1 / 19

TOP TWENTY

Virginia CrimLaw. TOP TWENTY. Class 1 Misdemeanor. HB-326 / § 18.2-386.2 Unlawful dissemination or sale of images of another. intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate maliciously disseminates or sells created by any means whatsoever

devin-adkins
Download Presentation

TOP TWENTY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Virginia CrimLaw TOP TWENTY

  2. Class 1 Misdemeanor HB-326 / § 18.2-386.2Unlawful dissemination or sale of images of another intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate maliciously disseminates or sells created by any means whatsoever knows or has reason to know that he is not licensed or authorized

  3. In Tension With: Enriquez v. Commonwealth, 283 Va 511 (2012) We establish the rule that when an intoxicated person is seated behind the steering wheel of a motor vehicle on a public highway and the key is in the ignition switch, he is in actual physical control of the vehicle and, therefore, is guilty of operating the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol within the meaning of Code § 18.2-266. Sarafin v. Commonwealth, OCT13, VaApp No. 1753-12-2 Contrary to appellant's assertions, the Supreme Court did not add the requirement that a vehicle be on a public roadway to the elements of the offense in Code § 18.2-266 in Enriquez. Rather, the references to being "on a public roadway" and Code § 46.2-100 were merely dictum as the issue in Enriquez was "the proper considerations in determining whether a person is operating a motor vehicle.

  4. Snowden v. Commonwealth,OCT13, VaApp No. 1570-12-1 A document is certified by the court where it is preserved, not where it originated

  5. The seating of a juror not residing in Virginia is not a structural error. Once an out of state juror is sworn, a claim of disqualification can only be brought with leave of the court after showing disability such as to probably cause injustice in a criminal case to the Commonwealth or to the accused. Prieto v. Warden Sussex I,SEP13, VaSC No. 122054Juror From Another State "He shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of his vicinage" Va. Const Art I Sec. 8

  6. 19.2-161: Perjury Applying for Court Appointed Attorney 19.2-159(B)(2) "Real estate owned by the accused shall be considered in terms of the amounts which could be raised by a loan on the property Personal Property "convertible into cash within a reasonable period of time" Henry v. Commonwealth,FEB14, VaApp No. 0631-13-2 • 18.2-168: Forging a Public Record • The Commonwealth is required to prove conduct with respect to the document that alters the genuineness and authenticity of those documents • False Identity Information

  7. Linnon v. Commonwealth,JAN14, VaSC No. 130179Objection by Co-Defendant “Although we have never before considered whether an objection raised by one party may be attributed to another party who does not expressly join it . . . We adopt the general . . . and hold that one party may not rely on the objection of another party to preserve an argument for appeal without expressly joining in the objection.”

  8. Grimes v. Commonwealth, OCT13, VaApp No. 0293-13-1Value of Stolen Pipes Replacement value of copper pipes cut out of a house does not establish actual or fair market value of the pipe Does not tell us how to determine the value

  9. Carew v. Commonwealth,NOV13, VaApp No. 0153-13-4§ 46.2-300 – Notice of Suspension When the predicate for invalidity under Code § 46.2-300 is a suspended license, the Commonwealth must prove the defendant received notice of the suspension

  10. Bonner v. Commonwealth,JUL13, VaApp en banc No. 0565-11-218.2-311.1 – Venue / Altering Serial Number Altering the serial number of a firearm is a discrete offense. Venue is at the place where the alteration was done.

  11. D’Amico v. Commonwealth,FEB14, VaSC No. 13054918.2-268.3 – Refusal / Breath Certificate The refusal form is not an element of the offense Failure to properly execute a refusal form is not dispositive of guilt or innocence

  12. Case v. Commonwealth,FEB14, VaApp No. 2188-12-418.2-266 – No Intent Required “As long as the Commonwealth proves beyond a reasonable doubt that an intoxicated individual 'operated' his vehicle, regardless of intent, he is guilty of driving while under the influence.”

  13. Murry v. Commonwealth,JUN13, VaApp No. 0522-12-2Lifetime 4th Amendment Revocation Pattern of concealed sexual abuse of a minor

  14. Papol v. Commonwealth,MAR14, VaApp No. 1765-12-1§ 18.2-374.1:1 – Multiple Possessions Child Porn Second or Subsequent Violation - NOT CONVICTION Whether the pictures arrive at the same or different times is not relevant

  15. The 4th Circuit opinion is not binding while the Virginia Supreme Court opinion is. Therefore, the statute is constitutional, particularly as it applies to minors and adults. Saunders v. Commonwealth,FEB14, VaApp No. 1630-12-2Which Precedent Binds McDonald v. Moose, 710 F.3d 154 (4th Cir. 2013). § 18.2-361(A) – Anti-Sodomy Law Unconstitutional

  16. § 8.01-384(A)- Contemporaneous Objection • Commonwealth v. Amos, FEB14, VaSC No. 130757 • Held in Contempt / Not Allowed • Maxwell v. Commonwealth, FEB14, VaSC No. 130810 • Gone to Lunch • Rowe v. Commonwealth, FEB14, VaSC No. 130881 • Judge Delay / Motion

  17. Allen v. Commonwealth,JAN14, VaSC No. 130304Corpus Delicti Rule / Sex Offenses Against Minors “Slight corroboration of the confession is required” Establishing opportunity does not provide corroboration

  18. Overrules Harris v. United States, 536 U. S. 545 (2002) Alleyne v. US,JUN13, USSC No. 11–9335 “The core crime and the fact triggering the mandatory minimum sentence together constitute a new, aggravated crime, each element of which must be submitted to the jury.”

  19. Starrs v. Commonwealth,JAN14, VaSC No. 122028 The circuit court, upon accepting and entering a guilty plea in a written order, still retains the inherent authority to withhold a finding of guilt, to defer the disposition, and to consider an outcome other than a felony conviction.

More Related