The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Harris v. Commonwealth
No. 990270Supreme Court of Virginia
990270 Harris v. Commonwealth 11/05/1999 A defendant was not denied a speedy trial under Code § 19.2-243 and the Sixth Amendment where he was reindicted following the Commonwealth's motion for nolle prosequi o…
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.
990270 Harris v. Commonwealth 11/05/1999 A defendant was not denied a speedy trial under Code § 19.2-243 and the Sixth Amendment …
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- November 5, 1999
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
990270 Harris v. Commonwealth 11/05/1999 A defendant was not denied a speedy trial under Code § 19.2-243 and the Sixth Amendment where he was reindicted following the Commonwealth's motion for nolle prosequi on the original indictment since the time between accepting service of the second indictment and his subsequent conviction did not constitute a violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The judgment of the Court of Appeals 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
AffirmedDenied
The court's record, as written
990270 Harris v. Commonwealth 11/05/1999 A defendant was not denied a speedy trial under Code § 19.2-243 and the Sixth Amendment where he was reindicted following the Commonwealth's motion for nolle prosequi on the original indictment since the time between accepting service of the second indictment and his subsequent conviction did not constitute a violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: denied, 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