Pittman v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• mere acquiescence of defendant to setting of trial date does not toll § 19.2-243’s time period
• Counsel’s verbal objection and his endorsement of the Court’s order granting a continuance “seen and objected to” was sufficient to preserve defendant’s right to a speedy trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Robinson v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 1998-08-11· cited 47×
• Allen v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 1998-07-07· cited 22×
• Megel v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 2000-02-01· cited 5×
• William L. Harris v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 1995-12-12· cited 2×
• Commonwealth v. Perry
  Fairfax County Circuit Court· 1992-03-02· cited 1×
• Commonwealth v. Harris
  Norfolk County Circuit Court· 1996-04-30

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Barker v. Wingo
  Supreme Court· 1972-06-22· cited 12,108×
• Townes v. Commonwealth
  Supreme Court of Virginia· 1987-11-25· cited 187×
• Fowlkes v. Commonwealth
  Supreme Court of Virginia· 1978-01-13· cited 66×
• Flanary v. Commonwealth
  Supreme Court of Virginia· 1945-09-05· cited 39×
• Moten v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 1988-12-06· cited 37×
• Boaze v. Commonwealth
  Supreme Court of Virginia· 1936-01-16· cited 11×