Court of Appeals of Virginia, 1987

Grajales v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Virginia · Decided March 3, 1987 · No. 0508-85 · Per Curiam

353 S.E.2d 789; 4 Va. App. 1; 3 Va. Law Rep. 1815; 1987 Va. App. LEXIS 158 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

25 later published cases cite this decision.

McMillan v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2009)
Fairfax County School Board v. Rose (Va. Ct. App. 1999)
Timothy M. Barrett v. Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Social Services, etc. (Va. Ct. App. 2011)
Kenyatta Ferrell Jones v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2017)
Edward Leonard Christian, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2012)
Timothy M. Barrett v. Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Social Services, etc. (Va. Ct. App. 2011)
Diane Spreadbury v. Peter E. Spreadbury (Va. Ct. App. 2010)
R K Enterprises, Inc., T/A Goldies Convenience Store v. Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (Va. Ct. App. 2009)
Timothy Todd Buch v. Laura Jeanne Buch (Va. Ct. App. 2008)
Jordan v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2007)
B.P. SOLAR and Ace American Insurance Company v. Carolyn E. JONES (Va. Ct. App. 2007)
County of Washington Social Services and v. Betty Severt Rouse (Va. Ct. App. 2007)
Karen Diane Doades v. Charles Timothy Doades (Va. Ct. App. 2005)
Edward D. Wilson v. Diane Wilson (Va. Ct. App. 2004)
Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc. v. Commonwealth ex rel. Virginia Water Control Board (Richmond County Circuit Court 2004)
Johnson v. Paul Johnson Plastering & National Surety Corp. (Va. Ct. App. 2002)
Wilson v. Remax Gateway, L.L.C. (Va. Cir. Ct. 2002)
Cloutier v. Queen (Va. Ct. App. 2001)
Robdau v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2001)
Commonwealth v. Darden (Norfolk County Circuit Court 2000)
Fairfax County School Board v. Rose (Va. Ct. App. 1998)
Old House Specialists v. David R. Coleman (Va. Ct. App. 1997)
General Medical Corp. v. Kobs (Wis. Ct. App. 1993)
Wallace Lee Stokes v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 2002)
Jerry F. Hunter v. Virginia Employment Commission (Va. Ct. App. 1997)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Per Curiam

By an unpublished memorandum opinion, a unanimous panel of this Court reversed and dismissed the conviction of Grajales. 1 The Commonwealth requested a rehearing en banc.

Code § 17-116.02(D) provides, in pertinent part, the following:

The Court of Appeals shall sit en banc (i) when there is a dissent in the panel to which the case was originally assigned and an aggrieved party requests an en banc hearing and at least two other judges of the court vote in favor of such a hearing, or (ii) when any judge of any panel shall certify that in his opinion a decision of such panel of the Court is in conflict with a prior decision of the Court or of any panel thereof and two other judges of the Court concur in that view.

There was neither a dissent in the panel nor a certification that the decision conflicted with a prior decision of the Court. We conclude, therefore, that neither requirement for an en banc hearing has been satisfied. Accordingly, the application for a rehearing en banc is denied.

Denied.

Koontz, C.J., Baker, J., Barrow, J., Benton, J., Cole, J., Coleman, J., Duff, J., Hodges, J., Keenan, J., and Moon, J., concurred.

Unpublished memorandum opinions of this Court are not to be cited or relied upon as precedent except for the purpose of establishing res judicata, estoppel or the law of the case.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.