Richardson v. Commonwealth

80 Va. 124, 1885 Va. LEXIS 47
CourtSupreme Court of Virginia
DecidedJanuary 15, 1885
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 80 Va. 124 (Richardson v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Richardson v. Commonwealth, 80 Va. 124, 1885 Va. LEXIS 47 (Va. 1885).

Opinion

Lewis, P.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Of the various errors assigned it is necessary to notice one only, namely — the refusal of the circuit court to set aside the verdict and grant the prisoner a new trial.

The offence is alleged in the indictment to have been committed in the county of Henry; but, as appears from the cer-[125]*125tifieate of facts proven, no proof as to the venue was submitted, to the jury. The motion for a new trial ought, therefore, to have been granted. An indictment cannot be sustained without proof that the offence was committed in the county where the venue is laid. 2 East’s P. C. 992; 1 Chitt. Crim. Law, 557; Gordon v. The State, 4 Mo. 375; Brown v. The State, 27 Ala. 47; Holeman v. The State, 13 Ark. 105; Ewell v. The State, 6 Merger, 364.

It has been held, however, that if the evidence raises a violent presumption that the offence was committed in the county mentioned in the indictment, it will be sufficient. The State v. Burns, 48 Mo. 438. In that case the prisoner was indicted for murder alleged to have been committed in the county of St. Louis. At the trial the witnesses all spoke of the crime as having been committed on a certain street, and a diagram was exhibited showing the location of the house; hut it was not expressly stated that the street was in the city of St. Louis. The court instructed the jury that if they believed from the evidence that the prisoner killed the deceased in the county of St. Louis, then they should find him guilty, etc. ITe was convicted and sentenced to be executed, and on appeal the judgment was affirmed. See also 1 "Wharf. Crim. Law, sec. 601; 1 Bishop’s Crim. Proc., sec. 107. Bdt as no such presumption is raised by the evidence in the present case, the judgment must be reversed, and the case remanded for a new trial.

JUDGMENT REVERSED.

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

Related

Rene Martinez Romero v. Commonwealth of Virginia
Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2014
Larwan Badru Bonner v. Commonwealth of Virginia
745 S.E.2d 162 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2013)
Harding v. Commonwealth
110 S.E. 376 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1922)
West v. Commonwealth
99 S.E. 654 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1919)
Union Pacific Railroad v. State
130 N.W. 277 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1911)
Wilson v. State
36 S.W. 842 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1896)
Fitch v. Commonwealth
24 S.E. 272 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1896)
Savage v. Commonwealth
5 S.E. 563 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1888)
Butler v. Commonwealth
81 Va. 159 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1885)
Clarke v. Commonwealth
25 Va. 908 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
80 Va. 124, 1885 Va. LEXIS 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-commonwealth-va-1885.