Commonwealth v. Lincoln

60 Va. Cir. 369, 2002 Va. Cir. LEXIS 406
CourtVirginia Circuit Court
DecidedNovember 13, 2002
DocketCase No. (Criminal) 14825
StatusPublished

This text of 60 Va. Cir. 369 (Commonwealth v. Lincoln) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Virginia Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commonwealth v. Lincoln, 60 Va. Cir. 369, 2002 Va. Cir. LEXIS 406 (Va. Super. Ct. 2002).

Opinion

BY JUDGE THOMAS D. HORNE

This case is before the Court on the motion filed by the defendant to suppress evidence garnered from the defendant during a traffic stop of the vehicle in which he was a passenger. As the seizure of this vehicle was without a warrant, the burden is upon the Commonwealth to justify a warrantless stop. Helms v. Commonwealth, 10 Va. App. 368 (1990). Central to this issue is a factual determination as to whether the vehicle had in fact been driven over a double solid line in the Town of Purcellville. Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-804. But for a crossing of the double solid line, the manner in which the vehicle was being driven would not have justified the initial stop and the questioning of the defendant. Zimmerman v. Commonwealth, 234 Va. 609 (1988).

The testimony of the police officer making the stop and of the driver of the vehicle is in sharp contrast. In evaluating the veracity of each, the Court notes that the former did not issue a citation for the alleged infraction that was committed by the wife of the defendant. The time, place, and circumstances under which the observations were made do not help to tip the scales in favor of the Commonwealth. Where the Court cannot find a factual predicate necessary to establish the reasonableness of a seizure, the party having the burden of proof must fail. In this case, the Commonwealth has not established the reasonableness of the initial seizure of the vehicle.

[370]*370Mr. Lincoln, being a passenger in the vehicle driven by his wife, has standing to contest the validity of the seizure. The motion will be granted, and the evidence obtained as a result of the unreasonable seizure is suppressed. See id.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Helms v. Commonwealth
392 S.E.2d 496 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 1990)
Zimmerman v. Commonwealth
363 S.E.2d 708 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 Va. Cir. 369, 2002 Va. Cir. LEXIS 406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-lincoln-vacc-2002.