The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Orndorff v. Commonwealth
051478 Orndorff v. Commonwealth 04/21/2006 In a prosecution for second degree murder in the shooting death of the defendant's husband, the Court of Appeals did not err in approving the circuit court's determin…
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.
051478 Orndorff v. Commonwealth 04/21/2006 In a prosecution for second degree murder in the shooting death of the defendant's hus…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- April 21, 2006
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.
051478 Orndorff v. Commonwealth 04/21/2006 In a prosecution for second degree murder in the shooting death of the defendant's husband, the Court of Appeals did not err in approving the circuit court's determination that the defendant was competent to stand trial in the sentencing phase of the proceedings, but erred in approving portions of the judgment relating to the reasonable diligence and materiality standards for an award of a new trial based on after-discovered evidence of a mental disorder allegedly supporting an insanity defense. The Court of Appeals' judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
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
ReversedAffirmedRemanded
The court's record, as written
051478 Orndorff v. Commonwealth 04/21/2006 In a prosecution for second degree murder in the shooting death of the defendant's husband, the Court of Appeals did not err in approving the circuit court's determination that the defendant was competent to stand trial in the sentencing phase of the proceedings, but erred in approving portions of the judgment relating to the reasonable diligence and materiality standards for an award of a new trial based on after-discovered evidence of a mental disorder allegedly supporting an insanity defense. The Court of Appeals' judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
Outcome words in this text: affirmed, reversed, remanded.
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
