The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Elliott v. Commonwealth
No. 081536Supreme Court of Virginia
081536 Elliott v. Commonwealth 04/17/2009 In prosecutions pursuant to the provisions of Code § 16.1-253.2 for separate violations of a protective order issued under Code § 16.1-279.1 on two occasions, the evid…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
081536 Elliott v. Commonwealth 04/17/2009 In prosecutions pursuant to the provisions of Code § 16.1-253.2 for separate violations…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- April 17, 2009
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
081536 Elliott v. Commonwealth 04/17/2009 In prosecutions pursuant to the provisions of Code § 16.1-253.2 for separate violations of a protective order issued under Code § 16.1-279.1 on two occasions, the evidence was sufficient to support the judgment finding that a restrained party violated the provisions of the protective order at issue on one occasion by making a telephonic contact, but not sufficient to support conviction for conduct on another occasion in which the restrained party placed himself in a visible position one block from the residence of the party protected by the order. The judgment of the Court of Appeals upholding the convictions is affirmed in part and reversed in part.
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
ReversedAffirmed
The court's record, as written
081536 Elliott v. Commonwealth 04/17/2009 In prosecutions pursuant to the provisions of Code § 16.1-253.2 for separate violations of a protective order issued under Code § 16.1-279.1 on two occasions, the evidence was sufficient to support the judgment finding that a restrained party violated the provisions of the protective order at issue on one occasion by making a telephonic contact, but not sufficient to support conviction for conduct on another occasion in which the restrained party placed himself in a visible position one block from the residence of the party protected by the order. The judgment of the Court of Appeals upholding the convictions is affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Outcome words in this text: affirmed, reversed.
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
Documents and links