Legal Opinion
Lew v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Virginia
Decided May 16, 1995No. Record 2146-93-3PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*355COLEMAN, Judge.
In this criminal appeal, we hold that the evidence was sufficient to prove the corpus delicti for grand larceny and to prove that the defendant was the criminal agent.
“The rule in criminal cases is that the coincidence of circumstances tending to indicate guilt, however strong and numerous they may be, avails nothing unless the corpus delicti, the fact that the crime has been actually perpetrated, be first established. So long as the least doubt exists as to the act there can be no certainty as to the criminal agent.”
Maughs v. City of Charlottesville, 181 Va. 117, 121, 23…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gravely v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1889
- Montgomery v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1980
- Drinkard v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1935
- Maughs v. City of CharlottesvilleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1943
- Poulos v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1940
3Cited by9 opinions
- Burton v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2011
- Powell v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1999
- Brian Anthony Dove v. Commonwealth of VirginiaCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2011
- Donald Keith Woods v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2005
- Ladaris Britt v. Commonwealth of VirginiaCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2010
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.