The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Parker v. Commonwealth
No. 040726Supreme Court of Virginia
040726 Parker v. Commonwealth 03/03/2005 The Court of Appeals correctly concluded that claimed errors in a misdemeanor conviction under Code § 3.1-398.1 for operating a "food manufacturing plant" without Virgi…
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.
040726 Parker v. Commonwealth 03/03/2005 The Court of Appeals correctly concluded that claimed errors in a misdemeanor conviction…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- March 3, 2005
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
040726 Parker v. Commonwealth 03/03/2005 The Court of Appeals correctly concluded that claimed errors in a misdemeanor conviction under Code § 3.1-398.1 for operating a "food manufacturing plant" without Virginia Department of Agriculture inspection were not jurisdictional in nature and were not properly preserved for appeal, and that the lower courts had each properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction with respect to the matter. The Court of Appeals' judgment upholding the defendant's conviction 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
040726 Parker v. Commonwealth 03/03/2005 The Court of Appeals correctly concluded that claimed errors in a misdemeanor conviction under Code § 3.1-398.1 for operating a "food manufacturing plant" without Virginia Department of Agriculture inspection were not jurisdictional in nature and were not properly preserved for appeal, and that the lower courts had each properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction with respect to the matter. The Court of Appeals' judgment upholding the defendant's conviction 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