The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Josephson v. Commonwealth
230856 Josephson v. Commonwealth 12/12/2024 The Court of Appeals dismissed a criminal defendant's appeal under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine, holding that he forfeited his right to appellate review of h…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
230856 Josephson v. Commonwealth 12/12/2024 The Court of Appeals dismissed a criminal defendant's appeal under the fugitive disen…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- December 12, 2024
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
230856 Josephson v. Commonwealth 12/12/2024 The Court of Appeals dismissed a criminal defendant's appeal under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine, holding that he forfeited his right to appellate review of his criminal conviction when he absconded from probation during the pendency of the appeal. Applying the three-part test that governs the application of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine: (1) the appellant must be a fugitive, (2) there must be a nexus between the current appeal and the appellant's status as a fugitive, and (3) dismissal must be necessary to effectuate the policy concerns underlying the doctrine. Here, these requirements are met, and the judgment is affirmed.
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
1 entry, oldest first.
· Supreme Court of Virginia
AffirmedDismissed
The court's record, as written
230856 Josephson v. Commonwealth 12/12/2024 The Court of Appeals dismissed a criminal defendant's appeal under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine, holding that he forfeited his right to appellate review of his criminal conviction when he absconded from probation during the pendency of the appeal. Applying the three-part test that governs the application of the fugitive disentitlement doctrine: (1) the appellant must be a fugitive, (2) there must be a nexus between the current appeal and the appellant's status as a fugitive, and (3) dismissal must be necessary to effectuate the policy concerns underlying the doctrine. Here, these requirements are met, and the judgment is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: dismissed, affirmed.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
