No. 18-5350
Carroll Erman Crider v. Virginia
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-rights conviction-vacatur criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus indictment indictment-notice jurisdiction notice standing statutory-violation
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Crider's convictions should be vacated due to lack of jurisdiction and inadequate indictment notice
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . #1.Did the Supreme Court of Virginia err when it didn’t determine that Crider was entitled to relief to vacate the judgment when the statute of Virginia was violated Va. § Code 19.-220 by the Commonwealth not giving Crider an adequate indictment notice to defend himself ? Should Crider’s Convictions be vacated because the commonwealth never acquired . jurisdiction over his person or the case because it was never proven on the face of the record that the alleged crimes were committed in the Commonwealth of Virginia? .
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-08-07
Waiver of right of respondent Virginia to respond filed.
2018-07-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 24, 2018)
Attorneys
Virginia
Toby Jay Heytens — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Toby Jay Heytens — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent