Kirby v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that shooting near, but not necessarily at, the intended victim was sufficient to satisfy the “may be put in peril” element of Code § 18.2-279
• stating that the purpose of assignments of error is to direct opposing counsel and the court to the issues that the appellant claims as error
• stating that the purpose of assignments of error is to direct opposing counsel and the court to the issues that the appellant claims as error
• refusing to consider an argument when “counsel did not lay his finger on the error” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• shooting near, but not necessarily at, intended victim was sufficient to satisfy “may be put in peril” standard of Code § 18.2-279
• noting the defendant’s anger and statements prior to the shooting that victim was “going to die” in finding sufficient evidence that victim’s life was in peril

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).