Virginia Fairfax County Reckless Driving Double Jeopardy Claim Suspended License Lawyers Lawyer

Commonwealth of Virginia v. Corey S. Gibson
CIRCUIT Court OF FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA
May well sixteen, 1996

On February 23, 1996, a person law enforcement officer notices defendant Corey S. Gibson driving at unlawful speed in the Tysons Corner location of Fairfax County and starts off pursuing him. When defendant seen that he was remaining pursued by a law enforcement officer, he accelerated absent at a substantial fee of speed and crossed an intersection wherever a next law enforcement officer started pursuing him. When apprehended, defendant explained to the next law enforcement officer that he attempted to elude the officer since he was driving on a suspended license. On March 1, 1996, Gibson was tried using in the Fairfax County Typical District Court and convicted of reckless driving, driving on a suspended license, and rushing to elude. Later Gibson once again stood demo in the Fairfax County Typical District Court on similar charges brought by the next law enforcement officer and was convicted of each individual of the charges. Defendant sought critique of the purchase and claimed that his rights beneath the Double Jeopardy Clause of U.S. Const. amend. V and Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-294 were being violated when he was once again tried using in a further court docket on similar charges brought by a various law enforcement officer.

Troubles:

  • Irrespective of whether the driving on suspended charge has to be dismissed on double jeopardy grounds?
  • Irrespective of whether the double jeopardy assert applies to reckless driving and rushing to elude charges?

Dialogue:

This Court finds that defendant has achieved his burden of proof on the driving on suspended charge. The to start with officer’s testimony at demo was crystal clear that defendant was involved in a person ongoing act of driving from the time he to start with observed the motorbike in the Tysons Corner location right up until Gibson was apprehended by the Condition Law enforcement. The exact same things of driving following his license experienced been suspended were being implicated in the charges brought by both of those the to start with and next law enforcement officer. This court docket held that the driving on suspended charge need to be dismissed on double jeopardy grounds.

This court docket held that the defendant’s double jeopardy argument need to even so fall short as to the remaining two charges. The next law enforcement officer billed Gibson with reckless driving and rushing to elude dependent on driving carry out at the interchange of Routes 495 and 95. When the to start with law enforcement officer billed him with committing the exact same offense in the Tysons Corner location. The defendant has failed to create that the acts of reckless driving and rushing to elude, which assist the charges brought by the to start with officer bore any partnership to the charges brought by the next law enforcement officer. Consequently, as the defendant has failed to fulfill his burden of developing that the offenses are similar, the Court rejects his double jeopardy assert on the reckless driving and rushing to elude charges.

Conclusion:

This court docket consequently held the defendant responsible of reckless driving and rushing to elude but dismissed the charge of driving on a suspended license since the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause barred defendant’s next prosecution of the similar offense.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are furnished by the SRIS Law Team.  They stand for the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions.  The unique opinions should really be consulted for their authoritative content