Miles v. Com., Record No. 052568.

Decision Date08 June 2007
Docket NumberRecord No. 052568.
Citation645 S.E.2d 924
PartiesEllis Lorenzo MILES, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia, Appellee.
CourtVirginia Supreme Court

By order entered on November 28, 2006, this Court awarded the Commonwealth a rehearing pursuant to the provisions of Rule 5:39(e). Upon consideration of the record, the briefs originally filed by the parties, the petition for rehearing filed by the Commonwealth, and the argument of the parties, the Court concludes that the judgment of this Court and opinion issued on September 15, 2006 should not be set aside and should stand as issued. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is reversed and the Commonwealth's petition filed pursuant to former Code § 37.1-70.6 is dismissed with prejudice.

This order shall be published in the Virginia Reports and shall be certified to the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond.

Justice KINSER, with whom Justice LEMONS joins, concurring.

While I agree with the majority that the Court arrived at the proper result in its decision in Miles v. Commonwealth, 272 Va. 302, 634 S.E.2d 330 (2006), I write separately because, in my view, the rationale underlying that opinion is overbroad and unnecessary to dispose of the issues presented in this case.

The Commonwealth's own witness, Dr. Christine A. Nogues, testified that Ellis Lorenzo Miles' score on the Rapid Risk Assessment for Sex Offender Recidivism (RRASOR) was inaccurately calculated as four instead of three. At oral argument before this Court, the Commonwealth conceded that, if Miles had initially received a score of three on the RRASOR, the Commonwealth would not have forwarded his name to the Commitment Review Committee pursuant to former Code § 37.2-903(C) and would not have initiated any further proceedings under the Sexually Violent Predators Act (the Act), against Miles.

Since Miles has a substantial liberty interest at stake, see Townes v. Commonwealth, 269 Va. 234, 240, 609 S.E.2d 1, 4 (2005), in my view, the Commonwealth should not be allowed to proceed with its petition to have Miles declared a sexually violent predator under the Act when its own expert witness admitted the initial scoring that caused Miles name to be forwarded to the Commitment Review Committee for further assessment was inaccurate. That reason alone requires dismissal of the Commonwealth's petition. Thus, it is not necessary for the majority to decide whether a "correctly computed score" is a "condition...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Toghill v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • 26 February 2015
    ... ... COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record No. 140414. Supreme Court of Virginia. Feb. 26, 2015. 768 S.E.2d 675 John ... ...
  • Toghill v. Clarke, 16-6452
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • 15 December 2017
  • Foltz v. Commonwealth of Va..
    • United States
    • Virginia Court of Appeals
    • 5 April 2011
    ...record.” Kirby v. Commonwealth, 50 Va.App. 691, 698 n. 2, 653 S.E.2d 600, 603 n. 2 (2007) (quoting Miles v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 1, 2, 645 S.E.2d 924, 925 (2007) (Kinser, J., concurring) (citations omitted)). This approach encourages “ ‘judicial self-restraint’ ” by avoiding the resolution......
  • Butcher v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • 27 February 2020
    ...(McClanahan, J., concurring); McGhee v. Commonwealth , 280 Va. 620, 626 n.4, 701 S.E.2d 58 (2010) ; Miles v. Commonwealth , 274 Va. 1, 2, 645 S.E.2d 924 (2007) (Kinser, J., concurring).5 See also Cooper v. Commonwealth , 54 Va. App. 558, 566 n.1, 680 S.E.2d 361 (2009) ; Spruill v. Commonwea......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT