When you are called to court, there are two different ways to do it.
Typically, a warrant is used for felonies and for serious misdemeanors, while a summons is used for less serious crimes.
That's why I was so surprised to learn this existed from the Albermarle County Warrant Index:
UPDATE: Allen claims the warrant was for not having a fishing license.
I'm skeptical because the records involved appear to have been destroyed.
Why would a warrant be issued for a fishing license violation?
Apparently there is also a criminal hearing in 1973. Could that be the fishing license violation?


MORE TOUPEE'S, MORE TOUPEE'S!
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:05 AM
Okay, let's try that again:
It's SUMMONS!
Unreal!
Posted by: GLodge | October 13, 2006 at 10:06 AM
What was the charge?
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | October 13, 2006 at 10:07 AM
I can't even tell what that is. Can't we get more information than that?
Posted by: brimur | October 13, 2006 at 10:07 AM
OK......
Posted by: phriendlyjaime | October 13, 2006 at 10:09 AM
Is this the big news?
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:09 AM
That Allen was possibly served with a criminal warrant for a felony or serious misdemeanor? Yeah, I'd say this is the big news, wouldn't you?
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:13 AM
OH. MY. GOD!!!! This is earth-shattering news!!
Only THREE toupees?!?!?!
Posted by: I.Publius | October 13, 2006 at 10:13 AM
Deer heads have wigs?
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:15 AM
Does "C. of Va" Stand for "Commonwealth of Virginia"?
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:16 AM
Maybe he was bailing out Phil Kellam...
Posted by: Insider | October 13, 2006 at 10:16 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrest_warrant
In the United States, an arrest warrant must be supported by a signed and sworn affidavit showing probable cause that:
1. a specific crime has been committed, and
2. the person(s) named in the warrant committed said crime.
In most jurisdictions, an arrest warrant is required for misdemeanors that do not occur within view of a police officer. However, as long as police have the necessary probable cause, a warrant is usually not needed to arrest someone suspected of a felony.
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:17 AM
Wow - good catch. Plaintiff was the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:17 AM
Where's the beef?
Posted by: William Jackson | October 13, 2006 at 10:17 AM
Putting up a photo without telling what it is for it simply teasing people.
It leads one to conclude that there must not be any "there," there, if you cannot tell a story behind the alleged warrant
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:18 AM
Nice attempt at a subject change, Insider. Ben, we definitely need more information on this. Have you talked with people in the press about this, dude?
Posted by: Dannyboy | October 13, 2006 at 10:18 AM
Anon 10:16. Yes - which makes you wonder why that was NOT present on the GA entry.
Posted by: I.Publius | October 13, 2006 at 10:19 AM
Was this an ARREST WARRANT?
Va. Code Ann. Sec. 19.2-71
Who may issue process of arrest.
A. Process for the arrest of a person charged with a criminal offense may be issued by the judge, or clerk of any circuit court, any general district court, any juvenile and domestic relations district court, or any magistrate as provided for in Chapter 3 (§ 19.2-26 et seq.) of this title.
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:21 AM
Nice article on VNS, Danny. You write ten times better on there than on here.
Posted by: Insider | October 13, 2006 at 10:21 AM
The best part with Allen is the explanation. The Jewish heritage story was fun and was the Macaca tale.
The press needs to ask the campaign what Allen was served with.
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:21 AM
you are being duped......
this is a diabolical attempt to distract the media from allen's failing to disclose 1.1 million is stock options on his senate finance disclosure forms and the large lineup of people who dispute his "baseless" defense.
Posted by: Newport News Dem | October 13, 2006 at 10:22 AM
§ 19.2-72. When it may issue; what to recite and require.
On complaint of a criminal offense to any officer authorized to issue criminal warrants he shall examine on oath the complainant and any other witnesses, or when such officer shall suspect that an offense punishable otherwise than by a fine has been committed he may, without formal complaint, issue a summons for witnesses and shall examine such witnesses. If upon such examination such officer finds that there is probable cause to believe the accused has committed an offense, such officer shall issue a warrant for his arrest. The warrant shall (i) be directed to an appropriate officer or officers, (ii) name the accused or, if his name is unknown, set forth a description by which he can be identified with reasonable certainty, (iii) describe the offense charged with reasonable certainty, (iv) command that the accused be arrested and brought before a court of appropriate jurisdiction in the county, city or town in which the offense was allegedly committed, and (v) be signed by the issuing officer. The warrant shall require the officer to whom it is directed to summon such witnesses as shall be therein named to appear and give evidence on the examination. But in a city or town having a police force, the warrant shall be directed "To any policeman, sheriff or his deputy sheriff of such city (or town)," and shall be executed by the policeman, sheriff or his deputy sheriff into whose hands it shall come or be delivered. A sheriff or his deputy may execute an arrest warrant throughout the county in which he serves and in any city surrounded thereby.
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:22 AM
*yawn*
Nice try Ben. If there was any "there" "there" don't you think it would have been outted years ago?
Or are y'all really that slow on opposition research?
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:23 AM
don't give a crap about statutes, want to know what the specific charge against Allen was...you're wasting the vast space of the internet tubes by posting statutes
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:24 AM
Who's "George Franklin Allen" ?
Posted by: | October 13, 2006 at 10:24 AM