Roanoke Times, September 13, 2022

LEXINGTON — A Rockbridge Circuit judge declared a mistrial Tuesday in the case of the Roanoke man accused of causing the 2019 Buena Vista gas station explosion that killed four people.

###

https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/mistrial-declared-in-rockbridge-county-gas-station-explosion-case/article_c243dfc2-337b-11ed-a767-6b6300f78d46.html#tncms-source=login

ROANOKE — “Charges have been withdrawn against two people who had been accused of carrying out an October robbery in Roanoke County.

The prosecutor’s office moved to drop the charges against Christopher Kendall Nicholas and Natalia Simone Smith, both of Roanoke, during a hearing Thursday in General District Court, according to online records.

LEXINGTON — “A Roanoke man charged in a fatal explosion and fire at a Rockbridge County gas station was granted bond at a Tuesday hearing, his lawyer said.

##

‘We asked for a bond because we argued that he has significant ties to the community,’ Dean said. ‘He’s not a flight risk, and he has no prior criminal record, and therefore didn’t present a danger to the community.'”

Article: https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/man-charged-in-fatal-explosion-fire-in-rockbridge-granted-bond/article_3bfba57a-8bfd-11eb-85d2-13d622f7d61f.html

ROANOKE — “The very first Jaunt for Justice in the Roanoke Valley occurred in the fall of 2020 at Fallon Park in southeast Roanoke.

BLACKSBURG — “Lawyers who sued Virginia Tech on behalf of former cadets blasted the university on Sunday, alleging that its statement about the cases violated the confidentiality provisions of the settlements. Tech said Friday that it was ‘pleased with the outcome’ of the lawsuits, adding that the settlements affirmed that the policies and procedures of the Corps of Cadets and Student Conduct office were sound.

##

‘As a condition of settlement, Virginia Tech insisted on a confidentiality provision that prohibited any statement to the press, other than that ‘the case has been resolved to the parties’ mutual satisfaction.’ They wanted to keep the settlement private,’ Roanoke attorney Rob Dean said in an emailed statement Sunday after a story that included Tech’s statement was published in The Roanoke Times. ‘For Virginia Tech to now breach its own confidentiality provision and suggest publicly that the case outcome affirmed the proper application of its policies and procedures, is incorrect.’

ROANOKE — “A violent dispute at a northwest Roanoke apartment complex last winter left one victim dead by gunfire and will send another man to prison for just over five years.

Article: https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/northwest-roanoke-apartment-shooting-leads-to-manslaughter-plea/article_94684a48-626c-11eb-ab50-630725ff4e6b.html#tncms-source=login

ROANOKE — “Charges were dropped this week against a Roanoke man accused of forcing his way into a house and firing shots as he left.

Neither a witness who testified at a preliminary hearing nor security footage from a neighboring home could identify 32-year-old Rahyeem Tyquan Baker in the case, said defense attorney Rob Dean. ‘Mr. Baker maintains his innocence that he was not the man who fired the gun that night,’ Dean said.

Baker saw four charges against him — shooting into an occupied dwelling, use of a gun in a crime, entering a house with the intent to commit a crime and possession of a gun as a convicted felon — dismissed at the conclusion of a preliminary hearing held Tuesday in Roanoke General District Court, according to online court records.”

Article: https://roanoke.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/charges-dropped-in-roanoke-armed-home-invasion-case/article_e9a3176c-a187-11ec-be9e-dfaa16bd7da6.html

ROANOKE — “Michael Tyrone Terry kept his head bowed, eyes closed tight, as a jury rose Thursday to announce its decision in a case where Terry stood accused of murder, attempted rape and abduction.

• Under Va. Code§ 18.2-250.1:
  • Possession of small quantities of marijuana (less than one ounce) shall now be a civil offense punishable with a $25 fine
  • No court costs shall be assessed for possession of small quantities of marijuana
  • Officers shall issue a summons (ticket), not an arrest warrant, for possession of small quantities of marijuana
  • A person’s permanent criminal record shall not contain any reference to a civil citation for possession of small quantities of marijuana
• Under Va. Code § 18.2-259.1:
  • A person’s driver’s license shall not be suspended for possession of small quantities of marijuana, except, if they are a juvenile
• Under Va. Code § 19.2-389.3:
  • Records relating to the arrest, criminal charge, or conviction of a person for Possession of Marijuana, including any violation that was deferred and dismissed under the First Offender Program for Possession of Marijuana, maintained in the Central Criminal Records Exchange, shall not be open for public inspection or otherwise disclosed to employers, schools, colleges, etc.
  • Except, such records can be shared with the Court for pre-trial services, probation, sentencing guidelines, applications to work law enforcement, etc.
• Under Va. Code § 19.2-392.2:
  • A dismissal of a civil offense for possession of marijuana is eligible for expungement

Does the new Virginia marijuana law allow me to expunge an old conviction for possession of marijuana?

Not yet. The Virginia General Assembly is still considering whether to allow expungement of old charges for marijuana. For now, the conviction remains on your record. But, under Va. Code § 19.2-389.3, that old conviction cannot be shared with employers, schools, colleges, etc.

Does the new Virginia marijuana law allow me to expunge an old charge for possession of marijuana that was dismissed under First Offender?

Not yet. The Virginia General Assembly is still considering whether to allow expungement of old charges for marijuana. For now, the charge remains on your record. But, under Va. Code § 19.2-389.3, that old charge that was dismissed cannot be shared with employers, schools, colleges, etc.

—

Virginia’s Marijuana Decriminalization Law (2020):

• Summary: https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+sum+SB2
• Full Text: https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+ful+SB2ER

If you need help with a marijuana case, call our office at 540-585-1776.

You were stopped driving home; the officer arrested you, took a breath sample, and it was above 0.08. Open and shut, right? Not so fast. There are many ways to challenge it.

There are countless ways you can contest the evidence in a DUI / DWI case, to avoid jail, heavy fines, loss of license, etc. Here is a quick list of five ways to fight the charge:

1. The officer lacked sufficient case to stop your car. Under Terry v. Ohio, officers must have reasonable articulable suspicion that “criminal activity is afoot” to initiate a traffic stop. Officers might have seen you leaving Martin’s, followed you on Electric Road, and decided to pull you over. But that’s not enough. There has to be significant weaving, a violation of traffic law, or other cause, for a legal traffic stop. Often times, officers on the Roanoke DWI Task Force are looking for any opportunity to pull your car over after midnight coming from downtown. But a good DUI / DWI defense lawyer will subpoena the dash cam footage and check to see if in fact there was a basis for the stop; if there’s not, case dismissed.

2. The officer lacked probable cause for arrest. Let’s say the officer had reason to pull you over. But then, when they get you out of the car, you perform well on the various field sobriety tests. Only three tests actually count under the NHTSA Guidelines: eye test, walk and turn, and one leg stand. They have to perform those tests exactly as instructed in their training; if they deviate at all from the standard instructions, the tests are unreliable and inadmissible – and your lawyer can move to suppress the arrest, and dismiss the charge.

3. Your BAC was above 0.08 – but the machine was not calibrated. There is a popular misconception that the breath test machines are fail-proof. They are not; one thing you can do in a DUI case is secure the maintenance records for the department’s breath test machine from the Va. Dept. of Forensic Science. The machine’s get out of calibration from time to time just like any other mechanical device, providing a basis to challenge the admissibility of the breath test result.

4. Your BAC was above 0.08 – but not until hours after the stop. It is not illegal to drive and have a BAC above 0.08 hours after the stop; the only issue is what your BAC level was at the time you were driving. The law presumes that your breath test result reflects your BAC level at the time you were driving, so long as the officer takes the breath sample within three hours of your arrest. A careful check of the timeline could invalidate the result; so could a review of the time you consumed any alcoholic beverage, because it is possible your BAC was rising during the three-hour period, meaning, it was below 0.08 while driving.

5. You were in an accident – and the officer did not see you driving. In my experience, accident-related DUI’s are among the most difficult for prosecutors to prove in court. The officer never saw you driving, so they have to rely on the testimony of witnesses to prove you were operating a vehicle. Also, unlike a traffic stop, where the officer can verify you had nothing to drink after you stopped driving, the officer in an accident-related DUI has to establish that you did not consume any alcohol after the accident; if they fail to ask those magic questions, then it raises doubt about whether any BAC, etc., after the accident reflects your condition while driving, as opposed to after you had exited the car.

In summary, DUI / DWI cases are not straightforward for officers, prosecutors, and the court. There is a a lot a DUI / DWI defense lawyer can do to push back against the evidence, all in an effort to avoid jail, keep the fine low, save your license for work, and potentially, get the charge reduced or dismissed.

Need help in a Roanoke DUI case? Call for a free consultation: 540-585-1776.