Skip to main content

Arnold v. Commonwealth

Citations

  • 356 S.E.2d 847
  • 4 Va. App. 275
  • 3 Va. Law Rep. 2625
  • 1987 Va. App. LEXIS 180

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • considering the same analysis to hold that the evidence “did not constitute an excited utterance or a present sense impression”
  • statement lacking spontaniety which amounted to a summation of past events not admissible under present sense impression exception
  • statement lacking spontaniety which amounted to a summation of past events not admissible under present sense impression exception
  • question of the application of a res gestae exception not reached because narration was deliberate, not spontaneous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Barrow

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Arnold v. Commonwealth

15 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.