Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Bishop v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided January 23, 2007No. 1382051Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWillis, J.

I concur in the affirmance of Bishop’s obstruction of justice conviction. I dissent from the affirmance of his habitual offender conviction.

Our review of Bishop’s habitual offender conviction is controlled by Reed v. Commonwealth, 15 Va.App. 467, 424 S.E.2d 718 (1992). Pursuant to Code § 46.2-355, Reed was served with a show cause order requiring him to appear before the circuit court to show cause why he should not be determined to be an habitual offender. In disregard of that order, Reed did not appear. An order was entered adjudging him an habitual offender, revoking his driving license,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Reed v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1992
  2. Rose v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 2003
  3. Saunders v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2006
  4. Rose v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API