Greenfield v. Commonwealth

204 S.E.2d 414 (1974)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Greenfield v. Commonwealth

Virginia Supreme Court
204 S.E.2d 414 (1974)

  • Written by Arlyn Katen, JD

Facts

A Virginia jury convicted Ronald Greenfield (defendant) of the second-degree murder of Mary Frances Jordan, a 21-year-old college student. In 1972, Jordan and 17-year-old Greenfield worked together at a restaurant. Greenfield testified that earlier on the night of Jordan’s murder, Greenfield had used heroin and psilocybin, a hallucinogenic drug. Jordan drove Greenfield home from work around 12:30 a.m. Greenfield felt a falling sensation as he left Jordan’s car, and the next thing that he could remember was lying on the ground 15 feet from Jordan’s car. After Greenfield got up, he saw a person running away from the car and saw Jordan motionless and bloody in the driver seat of the car. Greenfield took his pocketknife from the car’s floor. Greenfield testified that he then noticed that his hand was cut and fled from the scene, believing that he must have killed Jordan. Police arrested Greenfield a few hours later at a hospital where Greenfield had sought medical attention for the cut. According to police, Greenfield confessed to stabbing Jordan with the pocketknife that police found in his possession. At trial, Dr. Kenneth Locke, a psychiatrist, testified that he had interviewed Greenfield at the jail twice to diagnose Greenfield’s mental condition and that he had hypnotized Greenfield to help Greenfield recall what happened to Jordan. The trial court did not permit Locke to testify about what Greenfield said while under hypnosis. Locke opined that Greenfield was unconscious during the stabbing, but Locke testified that he had insufficient information to express an opinion on the cause of Greenfield’s unconsciousness. Greenfield appealed from his conviction, arguing in relevant part that the trial court had erred by preventing Locke from testifying about what Greenfield said while under hypnosis. Greenfield acknowledged that no Virginia law supported this argument but argued that the hypnotic evidence would have helped Greenfield fully develop his defense.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (I’Anson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership