74°
forecast

Technical evidence gets arms conviction annulled

Posted to: Chesapeake Crime News

The Virginia Court of Appeals has vacated a firearms conviction against a 20-year-old Norfolk man, making him the first person in Virginia to be exonerated under a 2004 law allowing convicts to present new, non-DNA evidence of their innocence.

The appeals court granted Darrell Andrew Copeland's "writ of actual innocence," in a published decision handed down Tuesday. The court's decision comes after the attorney general's office conceded that Copeland is in prison for a crime he legally could not commit.

"Despite dozens and dozens of petitions of actual innocence, the court had not granted one until today," said L. Steven Emmert, an appellate lawyer and author of the Web site Virginia Appellate News & Analysis. "This is big news from a legal standpoint."

Copeland was convicted in Chesapeake Circuit Court in July 2007 for possession of a firearm by a felon after state police testified that his weapon was a black semiautomatic pistol. He was sentenced to five years in prison.

The appeals court's ruling Tuesday was based on the definition of a firearm. State law defines a firearm as an instrument intended to expel a projectile by means of an "explosion."

Chesapeake Public Defender Kathleen Ortiz, Copeland's attorney, filed the petition after learning of a lab test of the gun in question. Ortiz said she learned in December 2007 that Copeland's weapon was actually a "gas gun," which uses compressed gas to expel a projectil e.

The attorney general's office, in a rare move, supported Copeland's claim of innocence.

"They took a very responsible stand," Emmert said. "The attorney general's office deserves praise for this."

Appeals Judges D. Arthur Kelsey and William G. Petty and Senior Judge Rudolph Bumgardner heard the case.

"Having independently examined the record presented to us, we conclude the unique circumstances of this case make it prudent to accept the Attorney General's concession without further development of the facts," the court ruled. The case was remanded to the Circuit Court and is expected to be expunged from the record, Ortiz said.

"I'm pleased with the outcome and I encourage other people to try this," Ortiz said. "We have to test the limits and see where it goes."

Under the 21-day rule, Virginia law once required inmates to present newly discovered evidence of innocence within three weeks after sentencing. In 2002, the General Assembly made an exception to the rule for DNA evidence. In 2004, lawmakers did the same for nonbiological evidence.

Before the writ of actual innocence, the only avenue available to an inmate was to seek executive clemency from the governor, Emmert said.

"Now you have a mechanism you can go to with no political involvement," Emmert said. "It's a judicial function, and that's very important."

Despite the Virginia Court of Appeals' ruling, Copeland will remain behind bars for other crimes. He pleaded guilty in federal court to carjacking and conspiracy to commit robbery and was sentenced in April to 10 years in prison.

Arraignments are now being made to transfer Copeland from the Virginia Department of Corrections to a federal prison, Ortiz said.

John Hopkins, (757) 222-5221, john.hopkins@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

Be careful what you wish for...

I remember an old story from when I was a kid about a town in CA that had a ban on items that could expell a projectile. In the end they had to re-word the law because it ended up banning the following:

Guns
Rifles
Tennis Ball Launchers
BaseBall Launchers
Bows
CrossBows
Nail Guns

basically anything that could expell a projectile...

Public Defender - I guess

Public Defender - I guess that is her job, I just do not know how I would sleep at night helping criminals get off on technicalities.

Time for the state to change the wording of the law. This is what happens when lawyers become public officials. They leave things out and do not cover all of their bases. Do you think if we had engineers making laws there would be any loopholes??? The answer is probably not.

gas powered hand guns

can achieve several hundred feet per second! My .45 cal pistol can get up to roughly 900 feet per second
And , Jason? Joules is typically descriptive of electric energy like magnetism or thermal energy. It’s NOT descriptive of striking velocity, spin, torque, etc., which determines the damage to the target.
By all means...shame on the legislature for including "by means of expelling a projectile by means of an explosive.. " in the law and shame on Mizz Ortiz for zeroing in on that and subsequently arguing that this crime be dropped or dismissed to "test the limits" ...does this psycho-demonic attorney sleep at night?
The law is the law. The intent is any handgun, regardless of what a politician/states attorney/public defender includes in or argues the a law...no felon may possess may possess a handgun.
Period.
Doesn't matter if it's a cap gun!

Now

let's reinstate his right to vote so he can elect another slick lawyer, Obama. This is a waste of time and a system that is supposed to provide ramfication for persons truly wrongly accused and convicted. This nasty person is completely guilty and should remained locked up or executed--although Obama's potential running mate would likely commute that to life in prison at our expense.

How about this

Virginia legislators often forget to renew laws that have expirations. A friend of mine was charged breaking the wake in Dix Creek. His lawyer determined there was no valid law and it was dropped. Multiple other people were still convicted that day of the same offense even though there was no law to break.

For years people in Virginia were convicted of open container laws. Then an elected official was charged. His lawyer determined that there was no actual law on the books against it. Many, many people were convicted and paid fines and such even though it wasn't technically illegal. The next year the changed the law. It was slack. Check it out. I tell no lies.

The Law

Remember..Lawyers become judges and some where down the line they manage to become the lawmakers/politicans we elect. We have allowed the justice,
next witness!

Absolutely hate to say it, but this kind of mumbo jumbo

Law is exactly what we get when we elect people to write our laws who don't have an advanced education and who don't understand the proper use and or placement of punctuation. Then we hand a mess like this off to the attorneys who will absolutely tear it apart, just as they've done, and we act surprised. True enough, attorneys get plenty wrong, and so much is open to interpretation, but this is just another example that the general masses are not up to the task of writing our laws and/or governing us.

TAKE THIS!

Hey ldysknzfn,

Where does 'Proverbs' mention anything about cake?

It's just for show

It's pretty much just for show. They didn't specify what he had but it's probably one of those BB guns you can get for under $50 that looks like an automatic hand gun. Muzzle energy on those is about 5 Joules. In comparison, a 38 handgun is around 450 Joules.

The law definitely should be fixed to define "firearm" by muzzle velocity and energy like everyone else does it. Even if they did that, the air gun he had probably still wouldn't count as a firearm.

For all you folks expressing

For all you folks expressing outrage that he got off on a firearm's conviction relax. He still is serving 10 years for carjacking and attempted robbery. Good thing that the definition of a firearm requires an explosive (gunpowder) charge to be considered a firearm. I think the word "fire" gives a clue to the device's meaning. Otherwise in addition to pellet guns, paint ball guns, BB guns, suction dart guns, Frisbees, boomerangs, blow darts, and the like would be considered fire arms. A bit of a stretch don't you think?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: Crime rss feed    News rss feed   



Toolbox