Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Wilks

Citations

  • 530 S.E.2d 665
  • 260 Va. 194
  • 2000 Va. LEXIS 89

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a statute requiring notice within 21 days for seizure for forfeiture was directory because it \contain[ed] no prohibitory or limiting language\ and \[did] not affect the power of the circuit court to adjudicate the forfeiture proceeding\
  • holding that delay in providing notice of seizure for forfeiture was not a jurisdictional defect in part because respondents did not contend -6- that they had suffered prejudice constituting a denial of due process
  • holding that the failure by the Commonwealth’s Attorney to file the required 21-day statutory notice that the defendant’s property had been seized did not deprive the circuit court of jurisdiction to adjudicate the Commonwealth’s civil-forfeiture claim
  • holding that a statute requiring notice within 21 days for seizure for forfeiture was directory because it “contain[ed] no prohibitory or limiting language” and “[did] not affect the power of the circuit court to adjudicate the forfeiture proceeding”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lemons

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.