Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hudgins v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided June 8, 2004No. 0078021Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

ANNUNZIATA, J., with whom CLEMENTS, J.,

joins, concurring, in part, and dissenting, in part.

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion on the grounds that: (1) grand larceny from the person is not a lesser-included offense of robbery, and (2) Hudgins’s acquittal on the charge of robbery was not an acquittal of the lesser-included offense of petit larceny and, therefore, is not a bar to a subsequent prosecution for grand larceny from the person. Although I concur with the majority’s conclusion that collateral estoppel does not prevent the Commonwealth from prosecuting Hudgins for grand…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API