Virginia Courts Reverse Two Convictions, Reject Three Appeals

In Turner’s case, the circuit court noted that it would have been “cleaner” if prosecutors had introduced the continuance order establishing the February 2024 hearing. Turner’s counsel argued that the court could not take judicial notice of its own records because the jury had not been informed about records requiring him to appear.

The appellate court held that Hoglan’s probation violation was governed by Code § 19.2-306.1(A)(v), which covers a failure to follow a probation officer’s instructions when the relevant condition was not articulated by the sentencing court. The court also ruled that a $25 assessment tied to the unauthorized incarceration could not stand.

The record in Young’s case described the alleged assault in detail: he restrained the victim on a couch, digitally penetrated her despite her protests, forcibly removed her clothing and orally penetrated her. The court concluded that the victim’s testimony about fear, crying and attempts to resist supported the finding that force overcame her will.

Karapetkov also argued that the trial court should have continued a sentence-reconsideration hearing because his mother was hospitalized and might have provided information affecting an expert’s evaluation. The appellate court rejected the claim because he showed only speculative harm and no required prejudice.