Skip to main content

Wilder v. Commonwealth

Citations

  • 687 S.E.2d 542
  • 55 Va. App. 579
  • 2010 Va. App. LEXIS 24

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding that a 911 recording of a bystander’s statements “providing a narrative report of a larceny in progress” was testimonial
  • explaining that for this exception to apply, the declaration must have been spontaneous and contemporaneous with the event
  • “Contrary to Wilder’s contention, from the facts in the record, the trial court could have properly concluded that the statements contained in the tape recording were made contemporaneously or near contemporaneously with the acts they describe.”
  • “[W]here retrial is not barred by a double jeopardy analysis, any decision concerning whether retrial is appropriate without the improperly admitted evidence is . . . properly the province of the executive branch of government rather than the judicial branch.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Humphreys

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.