Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Paul Chisholm, III
Date: 03-25-2025
Case Number: 0334-24-1
Judge: John W. Brown
Court: Circuit Couort, City of Chesapeake, Virginia
Plaintiff's Attorney: City of Chesapeake, Virginia Commonwealth Attorney's Office
Defendant's Attorney: Click Here For The Best Chesapeake Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory
Description:
Cheasapeak, Virginia criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with malicious wounding.
Paul Chisholm, III ("appellant") of malicious wounding, in violation of Code § 18.2-51. When appellant failed to appear for his sentencing hearing, the trial court issued a capias for his arrest, convicted him of failure to appear, and sentenced him to 12 months in jail for that offense, plus 15 years with 10 years suspended on the underlying charge.
* * *
Legal issue Did the trial court err in sentencing the defendant to 12 months for failing to appear and in finding sufficient evidence to support a malicious wounding conviction?
Headnote
CRIMINAL LAW. FAILURE TO APPEAR. The case involves an appeal against a 12-month sentence imposed for the appellant's failure to appear in court for sentencing, challenging the trial court's interpretation of statutory sentencing limits under Virginia Code §§ 18.2-456 and 18.2-457, which govern direct and indirect contempt.
CRIMINAL LAW. MALICIOUS WOUNDING. The appeal addresses a challenge to the sufficiency of evidence required to support a conviction of malicious wounding, specifically focusing on whether the evidence demonstrated that the appellant acted with the requisite intent and malice under Virginia Code § 18.2-51.
Key Phrases Malicious wounding conviction. Failure to appear conviction. Indirect contempt charge. Unlawful wounding elements. Sufficiency of the evidence.
Paul Chisholm, III ("appellant") of malicious wounding, in violation of Code § 18.2-51. When appellant failed to appear for his sentencing hearing, the trial court issued a capias for his arrest, convicted him of failure to appear, and sentenced him to 12 months in jail for that offense, plus 15 years with 10 years suspended on the underlying charge.
* * *
Legal issue Did the trial court err in sentencing the defendant to 12 months for failing to appear and in finding sufficient evidence to support a malicious wounding conviction?
Headnote
CRIMINAL LAW. FAILURE TO APPEAR. The case involves an appeal against a 12-month sentence imposed for the appellant's failure to appear in court for sentencing, challenging the trial court's interpretation of statutory sentencing limits under Virginia Code §§ 18.2-456 and 18.2-457, which govern direct and indirect contempt.
CRIMINAL LAW. MALICIOUS WOUNDING. The appeal addresses a challenge to the sufficiency of evidence required to support a conviction of malicious wounding, specifically focusing on whether the evidence demonstrated that the appellant acted with the requisite intent and malice under Virginia Code § 18.2-51.
Key Phrases Malicious wounding conviction. Failure to appear conviction. Indirect contempt charge. Unlawful wounding elements. Sufficiency of the evidence.
Outcome:
Affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Commonwealth of Virginia v. Paul Chisholm, III?
The outcome was: Affirmed.
Which court heard Commonwealth of Virginia v. Paul Chisholm, III?
This case was heard in Circuit Couort, City of Chesapeake, Virginia, va. The presiding judge was John W. Brown.
Who were the attorneys in Commonwealth of Virginia v. Paul Chisholm, III?
Plaintiff's attorney: City of Chesapeake, Virginia Commonwealth Attorney's Office. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Chesapeake Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory.
When was Commonwealth of Virginia v. Paul Chisholm, III decided?
This case was decided on March 25, 2025.