Latif Racquel Khaliq v Commonwealth of VA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Elder, Bray and Annunziata Argued at Richmond, Virginia LATIF RACQUEL KHALIQ v. MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY JUDGE ROSEMARIE ANNUNZIATA MAY 7, 2002 Record No. 1588-01-2 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE Edward L. Hogshire, Judge James Hingeley, Public Defender, for appellant. Leah A. Darron, Assistant Attorney General (Jerry W. Kilgore, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. Latif Racquel Khaliq was convicted at a bench trial of misdemeanor escape from custody, in violation of Code § 18.2-479(A). He was sentenced to serve twelve months in jail, with six months suspended. Khaliq appeals his conviction on the ground that his conduct did not violate Code § 18.2-479(A) because his escape occurred during an arrest for a probation violation, not a misdemeanor. We agree and dismiss his conviction. The facts in this case are undisputed. On September 15, 2000, Officer W.E. Small received a warrant to arrest Khaliq for * Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. a probation violation. When Officer Small arrested Khaliq for the probation violation, he escaped from his custody. There was no evidence establishing that Khaliq had been arrested for a misdemeanor. Code § 18.2-479(A) provides, in relevant part: If any person lawfully . . . in the custody . . . of any law-enforcement officer on a charge or conviction of a misdemeanor escapes, otherwise than by force or violence or by setting fire to the jail, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. (Emphasis added). For the reasons stated in Lawson v. Commonwealth, ___ Va. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (2002), we hold that when Khaliq escaped from police custody, he was not in custody "on a charge or conviction of a misdemeanor." Because Code § 18.2-479 does not prohibit escape from custody based on probation violations, we reverse Khaliq's conviction and dismiss the indictment. Reversed and dismissed. - 2 -
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
