The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Carpitcher v. Commonwealth
No. 060638Supreme Court of Virginia
060638 Carpitcher v. Commonwealth 03/02/2007 The Court of Appeals' dismissal of a petition for a writ of actual innocence based on non-biological evidence, in which a petitioner sought relief based on recantat…
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.
060638 Carpitcher v. Commonwealth 03/02/2007 The Court of Appeals' dismissal of a petition for a writ of actual innocence based o…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- March 2, 2007
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
060638 Carpitcher v. Commonwealth 03/02/2007 The Court of Appeals' dismissal of a petition for a writ of actual innocence based on non-biological evidence, in which a petitioner sought relief based on recantation evidence provided by the victim of the crimes who had given contrary testimony at petitioner's original trial, correctly applied the statutory provisions governing such petitions, Code §§ 19.2-327.10 through -327.14. There was no abuse of discretion by the Court of Appeals in evaluating the evidence presented, 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
Affirmed
The court's record, as written
060638 Carpitcher v. Commonwealth 03/02/2007 The Court of Appeals' dismissal of a petition for a writ of actual innocence based on non-biological evidence, in which a petitioner sought relief based on recantation evidence provided by the victim of the crimes who had given contrary testimony at petitioner's original trial, correctly applied the statutory provisions governing such petitions, Code §§ 19.2-327.10 through -327.14. There was no abuse of discretion by the Court of Appeals in evaluating the evidence presented, and the judgment is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: 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
Documents and links