Henrico's at it again ...

Rusty Young Man said:

Fixed it for you.
Even the speeling.

Click to expand...

Thanks ever so awfully.

stay safe.

wrearick said:

From the description of the "execution" of the warrant- this was a "no-knock" style/type of warrant. Is anyone familiar with any special requirements (IN VIRGINIA) for this type of warrant? It seems extreme to break down the door of a 75 year old grandmother without some sort of justification. She could have suffered a heart attack from the shock.

Click to expand...

There are none. That is the precise evil that the "castle doctrine" which is part of the law of Virginia since 1603 is directed against. (Va. Code sxns 10299, 1-201). There is no such thing as a "no-knock warrant" in Virginia. Heaton v. Commonwealth, 215 Va. 137, 207 S.E.2d 829 (1974). Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with cases holding that searches and seizures undertaken once officers are inside a dwelling are "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment. Once they're in, it doesn't matter much whether they're there legally or not, saith the United States.

TFred said:

And in what contributes to the "parts are spread out all over the legal landscape," I have been assured by a very "gun-friendly" member of the House of Delegates that Virginia's being a strong Contributory Negligence state makes it very difficult (nothing is impossible in the legal system) to be found civilly liable in a clean use of self-defense. I don't have any statistics to confirm or deny that claim, but for what it's worth, that may be a significant reason that civil immunity is not a high priority.

TFred

Click to expand...

As soon as a politician says "don't worry about it" is when you should start worrying about it. A contributory negligence defense is usually just part of a defense. So it will take a trial. A civil trial can cost from 40-100K and a criminal trial about the same. And if you kill someone on your land ... you may get both.

Civil immunity is not a high priority because it strengthens the RKBA. Any of your "gun-friendly" friends who would not support immunity are not your friend at all.

Why should you have to consult with Westlaw when someone is on your land and may be a threat when you should just be able to consult with Smith & Wesson and deal with the issue.

As always,

user said:

There are none. That is the precise evil that the "castle doctrine" which is part of the law of Virginia since 1603 is directed against. (Va. Code sxns 10299, 1-201). There is no such thing as a "no-knock warrant" in Virginia. Heaton v. Commonwealth, 215 Va. 137, 207 S.E.2d 829 (1974). Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with cases holding that searches and seizures undertaken once officers are inside a dwelling are "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment. Once they're in, it doesn't matter much whether they're there legally or not, saith the United States.

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and wisdom. I have very little faith in our gubermant the older I get.

va_tazdad said:

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and wisdom. I have very little faith in our gubermant the older I get.

Click to expand...

The nice thing about User's comments is he tells it the way it should be and the way it really is in today's world.
That as opposed to one fellow here that claims to be a lawyer and tells it the way it is in the Sunday Comics. :uhoh::uhoh:

It would be interesting to do a civil suit for the trespass against the individuals who busted into the woman's house.

user said:

There are none. That is the precise evil that the "castle doctrine" which is part of the law of Virginia since 1603 is directed against. (Va. Code sxns 10299, 1-201). There is no such thing as a "no-knock warrant" in Virginia. Heaton v. Commonwealth, 215 Va. 137, 207 S.E.2d 829 (1974). Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with cases holding that searches and seizures undertaken once officers are inside a dwelling are "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment. Once they're in, it doesn't matter much whether they're there legally or not, saith the United States.

Click to expand...

Thank you......

user said:

There are none. That is the precise evil that the "castle doctrine" which is part of the law of Virginia since 1603 is directed against. (Va. Code sxns 10299, 1-201). There is no such thing as a "no-knock warrant" in Virginia. Heaton v. Commonwealth, 215 Va. 137, 207 S.E.2d 829 (1974). Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with cases holding that searches and seizures undertaken once officers are inside a dwelling are "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment. Once they're in, it doesn't matter much whether they're there legally or not, saith the United States.

Click to expand...

For general reading, Google found this for me today:

https://www.courtlistener.com/va/83jY/heaton-v-commonwealth/

TFred