In Hines v. Kuplinski, the Court in a per curiam opinion held that the trial court had not erred in its conclusion that the appellant's habeas corpus petition was untimely filed under Va. Code 8.01-654.
In Hudson v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Keenan held that the defendant had not been denied a "speedy trial" within the meaning of Va. Code 19.2-243. Interestingly, the Court noted that "[t]he issue whether a defendant's statutory right to a speedy trial has been violated does not rest, even in part, on the existence of prejudice from any delay in his trial date, or on his failure to make an affirmative demand for a speedy trial," but concluded that the defendant had waived the provisions of the Act by agreeing to a later trial date.
In Com. v. Minor, the Court in an opinion by Justice Kinser reversed the Court of Appeals and concluded in the case of a defendant accused of assaulting three different victims, that "trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to sever the charges because evidence of the other crimes was not relevant to the only contested issue, whether each victim did or did not consent to sexual intercourse."
In White v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Koontz reversed the defendant's conviction of escape, because he was never in custody as required by the statute, Va. Code 18.2-479. I got Judge Flannagan to make a similar ruling in a case a few years ago, where the defendant was sitting in a police car and decided to make a run for it - one of my few triumphs as a criminal lawyer.
In Com. v. Jones, the Court in an opinion by Senior Justice Stephenson reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the defendant's convictions of robbery and use of a firearm in connection with a robbery. The defendant took some shoes outside a store, then showed the gun to the store employee who ran outside after him, and these facts together were held to be sufficient to support the convictions, even though the taking and the use of the gun did not occur at the same time and place.
In Alger v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Agee held that the defendant could not possess a firearm anywhere, not even in her house, without violating Va. Code 18.2-308.2 as a convicted felon in possession of a firearm.
In Blevins v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Senior Justice Stephenson affirmed the trial court's denial of a motion for mistrial, despite evidence that a juror failed to give a correct answer in response to the question during voir dire about whether jurors or family members had ever been victims of serious crimes. The juror claimed she either didn't hear or didn't understand the question, but didn't mean to mislead anyone, and that she decided the case on the evidence. (Well, I'm not sure that makes the verdict more likely to be correct, if the jurors were not lying, but just didn't hear or understand what was going on.)
In Com. v. Jackson, the Court in an opinion by Justice Lemons reversed the Court of Appeals on the issue of whether a former Commonwealth's attorney as of the time of the defendant's original conviction had to recuse himself from sitting as judge on a later probation revocation hearing.
In Johnson v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Keenan affirmed the death sentence given the appellant, in a case where the defendant claimed he was retarded, and also challenged the constitutionality of Va. Code 19.2-264.3, regarding resentencing before a different jury after a successful appeal in capital murder cases.
In Powell v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Koontz affirmed the death penalty given to the defendant on his retrial following an earlier successful appeal.
In Hudson v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Lacy affirmed the death sentence given to the defendant, in a case where appellate review was required by law even though the defendant had waived his right to appeal.
In Jackson v. Com., the Court in an opinion by Justice Kinser affirmed the death sentence for the defendant convicted of murdering an 88 year-old woman in Williamsburg.