Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, Steven D. Benjamin
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, Steven D. Benjamin
University of Richmond Law Review
During the past year, the Court of Appeals of Virginia continued to be the major contributor to the development of substantive and procedural criminal law in the Commonwealth. Many of the court's decisions concerned the characterization of. police-citizen encounters in the context of both Fourth Amendment law and the rights of an accused under Miranda v. Arizona. A number of cases concerned the admissibility of uncharged misconduct, and the numerous double jeopardy opinions involved case-by-case application of Grady v. Corbin, Blockburger v. United States, and related statutes. A growing body of procedural law concerned the propriety of impanelling jurors of …
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, Steven D. Benjamin
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, Steven D. Benjamin
University of Richmond Law Review
During the past year, the Virginia Court of Appeals continued to be the primary contributor to the development of substantive and procedural criminal law in Virginia. As it has in years past, the court ruled on numerous Fourth Amendment questions, particularly with respect to investigatory detention. Other significant rulings dealt with double jeopardy, discovery, due process, and trial procedure.
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, Steven D. Benjamin
Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Law And Procedure, Steven D. Benjamin
University of Richmond Law Review
During the past year, the Virginia Court of Appeals continued in its role as the most significant contributor to criminal case law. The court ruled on a myriad of issues; the recurring topics involved arrest and investigatory detention, self-defense, the execution of search warrants, double jeopardy, the admissibility of eye-witness identification, and the circumstances and admissibility of a police interrogation. Also, the court ruled on numerous trial and procedural questions regularly encountered by the circuit courts and criminal practitioners.