Case StudiesShopliftingSnead v. Commonwealth

Shoplifting Case Study

Snead v. Commonwealth

📍 Virginia Court of Appeals📅 2014⚖️ Virginia Code § 18.2-103

Legal Issue

Whether the defendant's prior shoplifting convictions were properly admitted to prove intent in the current case.

Court Holding

The court reversed the conviction, finding that the prior shoplifting convictions were improperly admitted as propensity evidence. The court held that evidence of prior bad acts is generally inadmissible to prove that the defendant acted in conformity with those prior acts on the current occasion.

Defense Takeaway

Prior bad acts evidence is generally inadmissible in Virginia criminal cases to prove propensity. D.J. Rivera objects to the admission of prior shoplifting convictions and other prior bad acts evidence, and moves for mistrial where such evidence is improperly admitted.

Relevant Virginia Law

This case involves § 18.2-103 of the Virginia Code. For a full analysis of how this statute applies to your case, consult with D.J. Rivera.

Facing Shoplifting Charges in Virginia?

D.J. Rivera applies the lessons of cases like this one to defend clients throughout Richmond and Northern Virginia. Free consultation available 24/7.

Get Your Free Consultation