Moore v. Commonwealth

In Moore v. Commonwealth, 14 Va. App. 198, 200, 415 S.E.2d 247, 249 (1992), the accused was convicted for driving after having been declared an habitual offender, over his claim that the conviction violated the double jeopardy prohibition based on his prior conviction for two misdemeanors arising out of the same act of driving. See id. at 199, 415 S.E.2d at 248. He appealed, and the Commonwealth argued that his claim was procedurally barred because he never introduced evidence to prove his prior misdemeanor convictions. See 14 Va. App. at 199-200, 415 S.E.2d at 248. The Court held that although the Commonwealth did not make "an express concession of the accused's misdemeanor convictions, . . . the clear import of the Commonwealth's position" in arguing that the convictions were not lesser-included offenses was that the convictions did, in fact, exist. Id. at 200, 415 S.E.2d at 249. The Court held that the Commonwealth, "'having conceded the matter before the trial judge, . . . was bound by its concession and was not entitled to raise this issue for the first time on appeal.'" Id.