Commonwealth v. Walters

49 Va. Cir. 539, 1998 Va. Cir. LEXIS 390
CourtLancaster County Circuit Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1998
StatusPublished

This text of 49 Va. Cir. 539 (Commonwealth v. Walters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Lancaster County 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. Walters, 49 Va. Cir. 539, 1998 Va. Cir. LEXIS 390 (Va. Super. Ct. 1998).

Opinion

By Judge Joseph E. Spruill, Jr.

Defendant moves to dismiss a summons charging possession of alcohol by a minor because the Code Section stated in the summons is incorrect.

The motion will be denied. An incorrect citation of a code section in a warrant does not control determination of what offense was charged when the defendant plainly had notice of the true nature of the charge against her. This defendant had sufficient notice of the actual crime with which she was charged notwithstanding the misrecital of the statute in the summons. See Flaherty v. Commonwealth, 14 Va. App. 148 (1992).

Rule 3A:4(b) requires that a summons state the name of the accused, describe the offense charged, and state whether the offense is a violation of a state, county, city, or town law, and be signed by the magistrate or law enforcement officer. We find that the summons in question meets these requirements.

Accordingly, the defendant should appear for sentencing as scheduled.

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

Related

Flaherty v. Commonwealth
415 S.E.2d 867 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 Va. Cir. 539, 1998 Va. Cir. LEXIS 390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-walters-vacclancaster-1998.