Commonwealth v. Baker
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Jeramie Michael Baker
Opinion
PER CURIAM In this appeal, the Court reviews a judgment of the Court of Appeals declaring the transfer of jurisdiction from a juvenile and domestic relations district court to a circuit court ineffectual and the subsequent convictions void.
Baker v. Commonwealth, 28 Va. App. 306 , 504 S.E.2d 394 (1998).
Central to the decision below was the interpretation of Code § 16.1-263(A), which provides, in part, that after a juvenile petition is filed, the court shall direct summonses “to the parents” of the juvenile. Here, even though the juvenile’s mother received notice, the juvenile’s biological father was not notified, there was no attempt to give him notice, and the circuit court made no certification on the record that the identity of the father was not reasonably ascertainable.
Parenthetically, we note the statute has been amended effective July 1, 1999 to provide for notice to “at least one parent.” Acts 1999, ch. 952.
For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, we will affirm the court’s judgment.
Furthermore, we decline the Attorney General’s request that we apply this judgment prospectively only; retrospective application is mandated by Gogley v. Peyton, 208 Va. 679 , 160 S.E.2d 746 (1968).
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(failure to give both parents notice of juvenile proceedings renders void juvenile’s subsequent criminal conviction on transfer to circuit court)
Cited by 49 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.