Virginia's Supreme Court upheld the denial of a religion-based name change to a prisoner serving a long sentence for a brutal robbery and murder. The trial court had said the name change would frustrate criminal law's goals of "retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation. ... Someone so dangerous should have his identity fixed, certain and intractable not only with the Department of Corrections but with all of society. There should never be even a hint of confusion as to who this person is ... ."
The name change would have left the prisoner's last name in place, but changed his first and middle names to Muslim ones.
The Supreme Court says Code §8.01-217(D) grants a trial court wide discretion to disapprove a name change, and that on the other hand it requires denial of the change unless it "would not frustrate a legitimate law enforcement purpose, is not sought for a fraudulent purpose, and would not otherwise infringe on the rights of others."
The trial court had also said the victims had a right to know that the convict would serve his sentence under his original name. The Supreme Court says that the reasons the trial judge gave are within the scope of his discretion, as he could reasonably conclude that such a brutal murderer must keep his name "for the peace of mind of the victims and their families and to avoid any possible future confusion ... ." It also cited the fact that the convict would be released at age 65, and that he had admitted that if he could not change his name, that would not hinder his free exercise of religion.
BRIAN WENDALL JORDAN v. COMMONWEALTH, 2/22/18