Nesselrodt v. Commonwealth

Benton, J., • with whom Barrow, J., and Koontz, J.,

join dissenting.

Each of the appellants was adjudged to be an habitual offender under the motor vehicle laws as specified in Code §§ 46.2-351 through 46.2-363. At the evidentiary hearings, the appellants objected to the use as evidence of the documents certified by the Department of Motor Vehicles on the ground that the documents were not transcripts or abstracts of the underlying convictions.1 Appellants argued that the documents did not contain the data *453that Code § 46.2-386 mandates to be included in “abstracts” and, thus, the requirements…