SCoVA recently granted a pair of criminal appeals in two cases, each styled Myers v. Commonwealth, which appear to raise similar issues about the correction of typographical errors in teh recod. Details at the Court’s website, and summaries after the jump.
MYERS v. COMMONWEALTH, Record Number 101312, from the Circuit Court of the City of Danville
Counsel
- Deena Kaye Myers (pro se) for appellant.
- Kevin Gross (Office of the Commonwealth’s Attorney) for appellee.
Assignment(s) of Error
- The circuit court erred in the issuance of the court’s orders of April 23, 2010 and May 14, 2010 because the circuit court failed to abide by its statutory and ethical duty to “make the record speak the truth” and correct an obvious and significant typographical error contained within the orders in question.
- The circuit court erred in the issuance of the court’s orders of April 23, 2010 and May 14, 2010 because the orders in question clearly contain and obvious and significant typographical error which must be corrected in order to “make the record speak the truth.”
MYERS v. COMMONWEALTH, Record Number 101313, from the Circuit Court of Pittsylvania County
Counsel
- Deena Kaye Myers (pro se) for appellant.
- David Grimes (Office of the Commonwealth’s Attorney) for appellees
Assignment(s) of Error
- The circuit court erred in the issuance of the court’s order of April 26, 2010 because the circuit court failed to abide by its statutory and ethical duty to “make the record speak the truth” and correct an obvious and significant typographic error contained within the orders in question.
- The circuit court erred in the issuance of the court’s order of April 26, 2010 because the orders in question clearly contain an obvious and significant typographic error which must be corrected in order to “make the record speak the truth.”