Christopher Artis Rich v. Commonwealth
This text of Christopher Artis Rich v. Commonwealth (Christopher Artis Rich v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Judge Benton and Senior Judge Overton Argued at Alexandria, Virginia
CHRISTOPHER ARTIS RICH MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY v. Record No. 2670-01-4 JUDGE JAMES W. BENTON, JR. OCTOBER 15, 2002 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY Richard B. Potter, Judge
(Myron J. Teluk, on brief, for appellant). Appellant submitting on brief.
(Jerry W. Kilgore, Attorney General; Steven A. Witmer, Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. Appellee submitting on brief.
A jury convicted Christopher Artis Rich of armed robbery and
use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. The issue raised
by this appeal is whether the trial judge erred by refusing to
allow Rich's attorney (1) to inform the jury panel on voir dire of
the minimum sentences for robbery and for the lesser-included
offenses of grand and petit larceny and (2) to inquire whether any
persons on the panel had religious or moral beliefs that would
preclude them from imposing minimum sentences.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. While this appeal was pending, the Supreme Court reversed our
decision in Hill v. Commonwealth, 36 Va. App. 375, 381, 550 S.E.2d
351, 354 (2001), which decided a similar issue. See Commonwealth
v. Hill, 264 Va. 315, ___ S.E.2d ___ (2002). The Court held,
[i]n summary, . . . that neither the defendant nor the Commonwealth in a non-capital criminal prosecution has a constitutional or statutory right to ask the members of a jury panel questions about the range of punishment that may be imposed upon a defendant if he is ultimately convicted of the crimes charged or of lesser included offenses.
Id. at 320, ___ S.E.2d at ___.
Accordingly, we affirm the convictions.
Affirmed.
- 2 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Christopher Artis Rich v. Commonwealth, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-artis-rich-v-commonwealth-vactapp-2002.