Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Moore v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided December 27, 2007No. 2091052Published

1ConcurrencePetty, J.

The majority opinion and Judge Humphreys’ concurring opinion both make a very valid point regarding both the application and purpose of Rule 5A:12(c) as well as our obligation to ensure that appellants adhere to our Rules. It is a point with which I would typically agree. However, in this case I believe that we can decide the basic question presented by the appellant—whether the trial court erred in denying the *6motion to suppress—without doing harm to the purpose or effect of Rule 5A:12.

While it is clear that appellant employed the irrelevant probable cause standard in his question presented,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Moore v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2007
  2. Moore v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API