Bland-Henderson v. Commonwealth
Syllabus
06/20/2024 In the appeal of a criminal case, the Court of Appeals did not err in applying Code § 19.2-295 by affirming the circuit court's denial of an untimely request for jury sentencing, because the defendant had waived his right to jury sentencing by missing the statutory deadline to request it. However, there is no presumption that \shall\ commands directed at private litigants are mandatory. Regarding voir dire, the Court of Appeals did not err under the provisions of Code § 19.2-262.01 in affirming the circuit court's decision to prohibit the defendant from questioning the jury panel about the mandatory minimum sentence, because voir dire on sentencing ranges is irrelevant to a juror's fitness to serve, when the jury will not be sentencing the defendant. The judgment is affirmed.
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Conyers v. MARTIAL ARTS WORLD OF RICHMONDSupreme Court of Virginia· 2007-01-12· cited 300×
- Wright v. Com.Supreme Court of Virginia· 2009-11-05· cited 78×
- Rickman v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 2017-12-28· cited 54×
- Nelms v. VaughanSupreme Court of Virginia· 1888-04-05· cited 42×
- Huffman v. KiteSupreme Court of Virginia· 1956-06-18· cited 31×
- Commonwealth v. HillSupreme Court of Virginia· 2002-09-13· cited 19×
Other cases named Bland-Henderson v. Commonwealth
1 other CourtListener record shares 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.