The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Zektaw v. Commonwealth
No. 081738Supreme Court of Virginia
081738 Zektaw v. Commonwealth 06/04/2009 Statements made by the defendant in a criminal case during a custodial interrogation should have been suppressed where he made a clear, unambiguous and unequivocal invo…
Clerk language is kept verbatim. Vote Files does not infer who is winning.The movement
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The proof
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
081738 Zektaw v. Commonwealth 06/04/2009 Statements made by the defendant in a criminal case during a custodial interrogation sho…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First seen
- Oct 4, 2026
- Last entry
- Jun 4, 2009
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
081738 Zektaw v. Commonwealth 06/04/2009 Statements made by the defendant in a criminal case during a custodial interrogation should have been suppressed where he made a clear, unambiguous and unequivocal invocation of the right to counsel prior to making such statements and police failed to honor the invocation of that right. Thus, the trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress, and the Court of Appeals erred in affirming such denial. The error was not harmless, and the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The case is remanded for a new trial if the Commonwealth be so advised.
Open court document ↗Documents and links