Prince William judge appointed to court of appeals

26 11 2007

Gov. Tim Kaine appointed Prince William Circuit Judge LeRoy F. Millette Jr. today to fill the Virginia Court of Appeals vacancy created by the retirement of Judge James W. Benton Jr.

Millette, who has a background as a law firm associate and partner, a sole practitioner and a state prosecutor, was named a general district judge in 1990 and elevated to the circuit court in 1993.

He is a graduate of the College of William and Mary and its law school.

Millette, 58, probably is best known for presiding over the capital murder trial of sniper John Muhammad.

“To me as a trial lawyer, temperament is the key, and Lee has always had that,” said John D. Whittington, a Prince William lawyer who tried cases against Millette when Millette was in private practice and has appeared before him after he was appointed to the bench. “He’s got the whole package.”



Definition of residence key to avoiding fees

28 09 2007

Narrow legal analysis may be a more effective way to attack Virginia’s civil remedial fees than broad constitutional and public policy arguments.

That could be a lesson from the case of Rajesh Cherkukuri, an Indian national who was convicted earlier this month of drunken driving in Prince William County.

Cherukuri has a Virginia driver’s license and has lived in the state for about a year. Prosecutors insisted that those circumstance made him a Virginia resident and subject for payment of $2,250 in civil fees over 26 months. The exclusion of nonresidents from liability for the fees has been the major argument opponents of the law have raised in saying that it violates the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions.

Not so fast, Cherukuri’s attorney, Lou Brooks of Manassas, countered. The definition of resident in Code § 46.1-206.1 is ambiguous enough that interpretation of the term requires a look at the use of the word in other sections of Title 46.2, Brooks insisted.

General District Judge Craig D. Johnston agreed. A key concept of residence is domicile, which generally requires “the intention to remain [in a place] for an indefinite period of time.” Cherukuri doesn’t fit that definition because he is in this country on a temporary student visa and intends to return to India, Johnston wrote on Sept. 25 in Commonwealth v. Cherukuri (VLW 007-12-03).

“I conclude that the statutory exemption of nonresident students from those persons who are deemed residents for purposes of Title 46.2, including impositions of the civil remedial fee, was a deliberate exemption,” Johnston said in refusing to impose the fees on Cherukuri.