Kimberly Rose O'Toole v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Kimberly Rose O'Toole v. Commonwealth

467 S.E.2d 819, 22 Va. App. 1, 1996 Va. App. LEXIS 197

CourtCourt of Appeals of Virginia

DecidedMarch 5, 1996

Docket2347931

StatusPublished

This text of 467 S.E.2d 819 (Kimberly Rose O'Toole 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.

Bluebook

Kimberly Rose O'Toole v. Commonwealth, 467 S.E.2d 819, 22 Va. App. 1, 1996 Va. App. LEXIS 197 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

UPON REHEARING EN BANC

By opinion dated June 27,1995, a majority of a panel of this Court affirmed Kimberly Rose O’Toole’s conviction for possession of cocaine. O’Toole v. Commonwealth, 20 Va.App. 540, 458 S.E.2d 595 (1995). Upon O’Toole’s motion, we stayed the mandate of that decision and granted a rehearing en banc. Upon such rehearing, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed for those reasons set forth in the panel’s majority opinion. Accordingly, the stay of this Court’s June 27, 1995 mandate hereby is lifted and its directives reinstated.

Judges Benton and Elder would reverse the judgment of the trial court for those reasons set forth in the panel’s dissenting opinion. See id. at 544-46, 458 S.E.2d at 597-98 (Benton, J., dissenting).

The Commonwealth shall recover of the appellant an additional $200 for services rendered the appellant by the Public Defender on the rehearing portion of this appeal, in addition *2 to counsel’s costs and necessary direct out-of-pocket expenses. This amount shall be added to the costs due the Commonwealth in the June 27,1995 mandate.

This order shall be published and certified to the trial court.

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

UPON REHEARING EN BANC

By opinion dated June 27,1995, a majority of a panel of this Court affirmed Kimberly Rose O’Toole’s conviction for possession of cocaine. O’Toole v. Commonwealth, 20 Va.App. 540, 458 S.E.2d 595 (1995). Upon O’Toole’s motion, we stayed the mandate of that decision and granted a rehearing en banc. Upon such rehearing, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed for those reasons set forth in the panel’s majority opinion. Accordingly, the stay of this Court’s June 27, 1995 mandate hereby is lifted and its directives reinstated.

Judges Benton and Elder would reverse the judgment of the trial court for those reasons set forth in the panel’s dissenting opinion. See id. at 544-46, 458 S.E.2d at 597-98 (Benton, J., dissenting).

The Commonwealth shall recover of the appellant an additional $200 for services rendered the appellant by the Public Defender on the rehearing portion of this appeal, in addition *2 to counsel’s costs and necessary direct out-of-pocket expenses. This amount shall be added to the costs due the Commonwealth in the June 27,1995 mandate.

This order shall be published and certified to the trial court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

467 S.E.2d 819, 22 Va. App. 1, 1996 Va. App. LEXIS 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kimberly-rose-otoole-v-commonwealth-vactapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack