 |
Although each case presents its own unique facts, appellate and trial courts sometimes issue opinions setting out the relevant facts and the court's conclusions about the case. Some opinions in Devine & Connell's recent cases include:
- In U-Thasoonthorn v. Commonwealth, the Court of Appeals of Virginia reversed a conviction for aggravated malicious wounding because the trial court gave an erroneous "heat of passion" instruction to the jury. Read the opinion.
- In Velazquez v. Commonwealth, the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed a conviction for rape on the basis that a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner's testimony invaded the province of the jury to decide the facts. Read the Opening Brief, Reply Brief, and opinion.
- In Commonwealth v. Johnston, the Fairfax Circuit Court judge ruled that the testimony of the foremost prosecution witness on sexual assault in Northern Virginia was scientifically unreliable. Read the motion and opinion. (Please note: you will need the free Adobe Acrobat pdf viewer to read these documents.)
- In Connell v. Kersey, Devine & Connell sued a Fairfax County prosecutor for violation of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act because he would not turn over police reports in a carjacking case. The Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press [www.rcfp.org] and Virginia Coalition for Open Government [www.opengovva.org] supported Devine & Connell with an amicus brief. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court of Virginia ruled that prosecutors need not turn over police reports even in the most serious cases. Read the opinion.
- In Herbert v. Commonwealth, the Court of Appeals of Virginia reversed the Prince William County conviction of a man for attempted capital murder and use of a firearm in the commission of attempted capital murder because the judge did not adequately instruct the jury. Read the opinion.
- In Donati v. Commonwealth, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals of Virginia upheld the Fairfax conviction of a man accused of perjury. Read the opinion and the dissent.
|
