ROMINGER LEGAL
Virginia Legal Research & Resources - VA Legal Resources
Need Legal Help?
NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE
This opinion or court case is from the Courts of Virginia. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH
COURT REPORTERS
PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS
PROCESS SERVERS
DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS
EXPERT WITNESSES

 

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

 
Web Rominger Legal

Legal News - Legal Headlines

 

Present:  All the Justices


DOUGLAS ALBERT JACCARD
      OPINION BY
v.  Record No. 031507             JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR.
        June 10, 2004
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA


FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

In this appeal, we consider whether evidence of a prior
probation revocation is admissible in the penalty determination
phase of a bifurcated criminal jury trial as part of "the record
of conviction" of the defendant's "prior criminal convictions"
pursuant to Code   19.2-295.1.
On July 15, 2002, the grand jury of Wythe County indicted
Douglas Albert Jaccard on a charge of malicious wounding in
violation of Code   18.2-51.  Prior to his trial on that
indictment in the Circuit Court of Wythe County, the
Commonwealth provided Jaccard with notice of its intention to
introduce evidence of his prior criminal convictions during the
penalty determination phase of the trial in accord with the
requirements of Code   19.2-295.1.  The notice listed five
criminal convictions on two separate dates, all in the Circuit
Court of Wythe County.
Jaccard was tried before a jury on September 4, 2002.  
After the jury returned its verdict finding Jaccard guilty of
malicious wounding, the penalty determination phase of the trial
immediately commenced.  The Commonwealth sought to introduce
into evidence certified records of Jaccard's five prior criminal
convictions and "a probation revocation conviction."  Jaccard's
counsel objected to the introduction of evidence of the
probation revocation, stating:  "A history of his prior
convictions is certainly proper at this point but a probation
revocation proceeding [is] not a conviction."  The trial court
responded that "a violation of probation is an offense" and
overruled the objection.
The jury sentenced Jaccard to ten years of imprisonment and
a fine of $30,000.  The trial court imposed the jury's sentence
in a final order dated November 12, 2002.  Jaccard appealed his
conviction to the Court of Appeals of Virginia.  In an
unpublished order dated May 28, 2003, the Court of Appeals
refused Jaccard's petition for appeal, citing Merritt v.
Commonwealth, 32 Va. App. 506, 528 S.E.2d 743 (2000).  We
awarded Jaccard this appeal.
In relevant part, Code   19.2-295.1 provides that:
In cases of trial by jury, upon a finding that
the defendant is guilty of a felony . . . a separate
proceeding limited to the ascertainment of punishment
shall be held as soon as practicable before the same
jury.  At such proceeding, the Commonwealth shall
present the defendant's prior criminal convictions by
certified, attested or exemplified copies of the
record of conviction . . . .

In Merritt, addressing the application of Code   19.2-295.1, the
Court of Appeals held that "[a] probation violation is not
itself a criminal conviction.  It is, however, a continuation
and part of the sentencing process imposed for a criminal
conviction and is, thus, admissible as part of the sentence
imposed for the prior conviction."  Merritt, 32 Va. App. at 509,
528 S.E.2d at 744.
Although neither Jaccard nor the Commonwealth cites them in
support of their positions in this appeal, we are of opinion
that two of our decisions rendered subsequent to Merritt guide
our resolution of this appeal.  In Green v. Commonwealth, 263
Va. 191, 557 S.E.2d 230 (2002), we considered whether an appeal
from a circuit court order revoking a defendant's probation
initially lies within the jurisdiction of this Court or the
Court of Appeals.  Id. at 192, 557 S.E.2d at 231.  We concluded
that the Court of Appeals initially has jurisdiction in
probation revocation appeals.  In reaching that conclusion, we
held that "[a]lthough a probation revocation hearing is not a
stage of a criminal prosecution, and thus does not afford a
convict all rights attending a criminal prosecution, such
revocation hearing is nevertheless a criminal proceeding."  263
Va. at 195-96, 557 S.E.2d at 233 (citation omitted).
Subsequently, following the Court of Appeals decision in
the present case, we applied our decision in Green in
Commonwealth v. Jackson, 267 Va. 226, 590 S.E.2d 518 (2004).  In
doing so, we expressly stated that "[o]ur decision in Green
overrules any implication to the contrary in Merritt" that a
probation revocation proceeding is a continuation of the prior
criminal conviction.  Id. at 229, 590 S.E.2d at 519.  The issue
we considered in Jackson was whether a trial judge, who had
served as Commonwealth's Attorney at the trial in which the
suspended sentence and terms of probation were imposed, was
required to recuse himself from the subsequent probation
revocation proceeding.  Because the initial trial and the
subsequent probation revocation proceeding were not the same
proceeding, we held that the issue of recusal was properly
within the discretion of the trial judge.  Id. at 229-30, 590
S.E.2d at 520.
While we did not expressly address the issue raised in
Merritt regarding the admissibility of a probation violation in
either Green or Jackson, it is nonetheless certain that the
Court of Appeals' stated rationale for the holding in Merritt
has been rejected by this Court.  Moreover, we are of the
opinion that a probation revocation is not a criminal conviction
and, accordingly, we hold that a probation revocation is not
part of the "record of conviction" contemplated by the
provisions of Code   19.2-295.1.  Thus, we further hold that the
record of Jaccard's probation revocation was not admissible in
the penalty determination phase of his criminal jury trial.  In
reaching this holding, we now expressly overrule Merritt.
For these reasons, the judgment of the Court of Appeals
will be reversed, the sentence imposed upon Jaccard will be set
aside, and the case remanded to the Court of Appeals with
direction to remand the case to the trial court for a new
sentencing hearing.
Reversed and remanded.






1







5



Ask a Lawyer

 

 

FREE CASE REVIEW BY A LOCAL LAWYER!
|
|
\/

Personal Injury Law
Accidents
Dog Bite
Legal Malpractice
Medical Malpractice
Other Professional Malpractice
Libel & Slander
Product Liability
Slip & Fall
Torts
Workplace Injury
Wrongful Death
Auto Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bankruptcy
Chapter 7
Chapter 11
Business/Corporate Law
Business Formation
Business Planning
Franchising
Tax Planning
Traffic/Transportation Law
Moving Violations
Routine Infractions
Lemon Law
Manufacturer Defects
Securities Law
Securities Litigation
Shareholder Disputes
Insider Trading
Foreign Investment
Wills & Estates

Wills

Trusts
Estate Planning
Family Law
Adoption
Child Abuse
Child Custody
Child Support
Divorce - Contested
Divorce - Uncontested
Juvenile Criminal Law
Premarital Agreements
Spousal Support
Labor/Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Sexual Harassment
Age Discrimination
Workers Compensation
Real Estate/Property Law
Condemnation / Eminent Domain
Broker Litigation
Title Litigation
Landlord/Tenant
Buying/Selling/Leasing
Foreclosures
Residential Real Estate Litigation
Commercial Real Estate Litigation
Construction Litigation
Banking/Finance Law
Debtor/Creditor
Consumer Protection
Venture Capital
Constitutional Law
Discrimination
Police Misconduct
Sexual Harassment
Privacy Rights
Criminal Law
DUI / DWI / DOI
Assault & Battery
White Collar Crimes
Sex Crimes
Homocide Defense
Civil Law
Insurance Bad Faith
Civil Rights
Contracts
Estate Planning, Wills & Trusts
Litigation/Trials
Social Security
Worker's Compensation
Probate, Will & Trusts
Intellectual Property
Patents
Trademarks
Copyrights
Tax Law
IRS Disputes
Filing/Compliance
Tax Planning
Tax Power of Attorney
Health Care Law
Disability
Elder Law
Government/Specialty Law
Immigration
Education
Trade Law
Agricultural/Environmental
IRS Issues

 


Google
Search Rominger Legal


 


LEGAL HELP FORUM - Potential Client ? Post your question.
LEGAL HELP FORUM - Attorney? Answer Questions, Maybe get hired!

NOW - CASE LAW - All 50 States - Federal Courts - Try it for FREE


 


Get Legal News
Enter your Email


Preview

We now have full text legal news
drawn from all the major sources!!

ADD A SEARCH ENGINE TO YOUR PAGE!!!

TELL A FRIEND ABOUT ROMINGER LEGAL

Ask Your Legal Question Now.

Pennsylvania Lawyer Help Board

Find An Attorney

TERMS OF USE - DISCLAIMER - LINKING POLICIES

Created and Developed by
Rominger Legal
Copyright 1997 - 2010.

A Division of
ROMINGER, INC.