Schwartz 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 construing arson statute to permit prosecution for every item destroyed “would improperly yield an absurd result”
• recognizing that a “literal construction of [Code § 18.2-81] would improperly yield an absurd result” because it “ ‘could be construed as permitting a separate arson prosecution for every item destroyed in a home or car’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Terra Nyree Hines v. Commonwealth of Virginia
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 2012-02-14· cited 25×
• Marcus C. Holman, s/k/a Marcus Cleophus Holman v. Commonwealth of Virginia
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 2023-04-18

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Schwartz v. Commonwealth
  Court of Appeals of Virginia· 2003-06-17· cited 29×