Tracy Wayne Claytor v. Commonwealth of Virginia

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Code § 46.2-357, which prohibits driving after being declared a habitual offender, does not contain a mens rea element
• holding that prior case law concerning Code § 46.2-357 “does not require that a driver receive notice of his current status, but rather that he receive notice that he has been declared an habitual offender”
• holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in not allowing defendant to present evidence of his subjective belief regarding his status as habitual offender because his belief was irrelevant to offense of driving as habitual offender
• “Because Claytor’s affirmative defense is without legal basis, the trial court did not err in granting the Commonwealth’s motion to suppress evidence related solely to that affirmative defense.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).