Tags
888-437-7747, Criminal Propensity, Criminal Prosecution, Dinwiddie, Dinwiddie Lawyer, Dinwiddie virginia, Dinwiddie Virginia Attorney, Dinwiddie Virginia Attorneys, Dinwiddie Virginia Law, Dinwiddie virginia laws, Dinwiddie Virginia Lawyer, Dinwiddie Virginia Lawyers, Dinwiddie Virginia Traffic Laws, Jury Trial, Law Group, Necessary Experience, Presumption Of Innocence, Relevant Facts, Traffic Case, Traffic Lawyer, Traffic Offense, Unauthorized Use Of A Motor Vehicle, Virginia Attorneys, Virginia Court, Virginia Dinwiddie Attorneys, Virginia Dinwiddie Laws, Virginia Dinwiddie Lawyer
Traffic Lawyer – Virginia
If you are concerned about a Traffic Case in Virginia, contact our law firm immediately for help.
Traffic Case – Virginia Attorneys
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary
experience to assist you with this matter.
Walter v. Commonwealth
Facts:
Following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Dinwiddie County (Virginia), defendant was convicted of a third or subsequent traffic
offense of driving on a suspended or revoked license and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle and sentenced to five years for unauthorized use and 12 months for driving
while suspended. Defendant appealed.
If you are facing a traffic case in Dinwiddie, Virginia, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
Holdings:
The Virginia Court made the following holding:
- Evidence of other crimes may be admissible if introduced to prove an element of the offense charged, or to prove any number of relevant facts, such as
motive, intent, agency, or knowledge. Other crimes evidence may also be admissible when the charged crime is part of a general scheme and proof of that fact is
relevant to prove an element of the offense, or to prove or explain how the crime was accomplished.
- It is well settled that evidence of other crimes or bad acts of an accused is generally inadmissible in a criminal prosecution. The purpose of this rule is
to prevent confusion of offenses, unfair surprise to the defendant and a suggestion of criminal propensity, thus preserving the presumption of innocence.
- A nonconstitutional error is harmless if it plainly appears from the record and the evidence given at trial that the error did not affect the verdict. An
error does not affect a verdict if a reviewing court can conclude, without usurping the jury’s fact finding function, that had the error not occurred, the verdict
would have been the same.
Traffic Case – Virginia Attorneys
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary
experience to assist you with this matter.
Article written by A Sris
Sris Law Group
1-804-201-9009
