fix(va): Make Virginia faster

juriscraper/opinions/united_states/state/va.py

@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
+from datetime import date, datetime, timedelta
+
 from juriscraper.OpinionSiteLinear import OpinionSiteLinear
 
 
@@ -7,6 +9,10 @@ def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
         self.court_id = self.__module__
         self.url = "http://www.courts.state.va.us/scndex.htm"
         self.status = "Published"
+        today = date.today()
+        if self.test_mode_enabled():
+            today = datetime.strptime("11/20/2023", "%m/%d/%Y").date()
+        self.two_months_ago = today - timedelta(days=60)
 
     def _process_html(self):
         for row in self.html.xpath("//p"):
@@ -17,7 +23,12 @@ def _process_html(self):
             summary = row.text_content().split(name)[1].strip()
             date = summary.split("\n")[0].strip()
             if "Revised" in date:
-                date = date.split("Revised")[1].strip()
+                date = date.split("Revised")[1].strip().strip(")")
+
+            date_object = datetime.strptime(date, "%m/%d/%Y").date()
+            if date_object < self.two_months_ago:
+                continue
+
             self.cases.append(
                 {
                     "name": row.xpath(".//b/text()")[0].strip(),

tests/examples/opinions/united_states/va_example.compare.json

@@ -1,46 +1,46 @@
 [
   {
-    "case_dates": "2004-03-05",
-    "case_names": "Washington v. United Parcel Service",
-    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1030637.pdf",
+    "case_dates": "2023-10-19",
+    "case_names": "Moison v. Commonwealth (ORDER)",
+    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1220536.pdf",
     "precedential_statuses": "Published",
     "blocked_statuses": false,
     "date_filed_is_approximate": false,
-    "docket_numbers": "1030637_20040305",
-    "summaries": "03/05/2004 In a workers' compensation appeal, the Court of Appeals erred in addressing an issue of causal connection that was not properly before that court and not properly before the Commission. As a result, there was no basis for concluding that the claimant would be unjustly enriched by receiving benefits to which he was not entitled. A prior award of benefits remains valid, and the refusal to assess a 20% penalty was error. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings. (Revised 3/8/04)",
-    "case_name_shorts": ""
+    "docket_numbers": "1220536_20231019",
+    "summaries": "10/19/2023 Considering defendant?s appeal from his convictions on multiple counts of aggravated sexual battery by a parent under Code \u00a7 18.2-67.3 and taking indecent liberties with a child under Code \u00a7 18.2-370.1, in which he argued that the circuit court erred in determining that the proffered testimony of a witness indicating that the defendant remained outside of the witness? home with her for several hours instead of accompanying his two minor daughters inside to sleep constituted inadmissible alibi testimony not timely disclosed pursuant to Rule 3A:11(d)(2), the Court of Appeals erred in addressing the merits of defendant?s argument where the defendant?s assignment of error indicated that the proffered testimony was not evidence of an alibi because it was instead offered to impeach by contradiction the testimony of his daughters, who were the victims. However, defendant never argued at trial that the proffered testimony was offered for impeachment purposes rather, he only argued that it was not alibi evidence. As a result, defendant?s argument was waived. That portion of the Court of Appeals? judgment is reversed, but judgment upholding the conviction is affirmed.",
+    "case_name_shorts": "Moison"
   },
   {
-    "case_dates": "2004-03-05",
-    "case_names": "King George County Service Authority v. Presidential Service Company",
-    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1030592.pdf",
+    "case_dates": "2023-10-19",
+    "case_names": "McKeithen v. City of Richmond",
+    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1210389.pdf",
     "precedential_statuses": "Published",
     "blocked_statuses": false,
     "date_filed_is_approximate": false,
-    "docket_numbers": "1030592_20040305",
-    "summaries": "03/05/2004 The circuit court was correct in specifically enforcing an agreement for the purchase of a private water company's existing water system by a county service authority under an agreement ratified by the authority's board, but erred in directing the authority to purchase other water and sewer system facilities because there was no resolution of the authority's board authorizing or ratifying a further agreement. The decree is affirmed in part and reversed in part.",
-    "case_name_shorts": ""
+    "docket_numbers": "1210389_20231019",
+    "summaries": "10/19/2023 In an as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of the escheat provision of Code \u00a7 58.1-3967, where a city obtained a judicial sale of a parcel of property subject to a statutory lien for delinquent taxes and the sale proceeds wholly satisfied the city?s tax lien, the holding of the circuit court that the statute required it to award a portion of the surplus sale proceeds to the city rather than an unsatisfied junior lienor, while required by the text of the escheat provision, nevertheless violates Article I, Section 11 of the Constitution of Virginia concerning the taking of private property. The circuit court erred in failing to so rule, and the case is remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.",
+    "case_name_shorts": "McKeithen"
   },
   {
-    "case_dates": "2004-03-05",
-    "case_names": "Harrison-Wyatt LLC v. Ratliff",
-    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1030634.pdf",
+    "case_dates": "2023-10-19",
+    "case_names": "Commonwealth v. McBride",
+    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1220715.pdf",
     "precedential_statuses": "Published",
     "blocked_statuses": false,
     "date_filed_is_approximate": false,
-    "docket_numbers": "1030634_20040305",
-    "summaries": "03/05/2004 The trial court correctly ruled that where a surface owner of a tract of land, or his predecessor-in-title, has conveyed all the coal in and under his land, title to the coal bed methane gas in the tract has not passed to the coal owner along with the coal. The trial court's judgment is affirmed. (Revised 4/1/04)",
-    "case_name_shorts": "Ratliff"
+    "docket_numbers": "1220715_20231019",
+    "summaries": "10/19/2023 In an appeal by the Commonwealth from a decision by the Court of Appeals of Virginia, it is held that Rule 3A:15 does not preclude the circuit court from reconsidering a motion to strike that was erroneously granted in a criminal case. While the Double Jeopardy Clause imposes some restrictions on a trial court?s authority to reconsider a motion to strike, those limitations do not apply here. Consequently, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and final judgment is entered on this appeal in favor of the Commonwealth.",
+    "case_name_shorts": "Commonwealth"
   },
   {
-    "case_dates": "1995-06-09",
-    "case_names": "Royal v. Commonwealth",
-    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1942223.pdf",
+    "case_dates": "2023-10-12",
+    "case_names": "Anderson v. Clarke",
+    "download_urls": "tests/examples/opinions/united_states/opinions/opnscvwp/1230172.pdf",
     "precedential_statuses": "Published",
     "blocked_statuses": false,
     "date_filed_is_approximate": false,
-    "docket_numbers": "1942223_19950609",
-    "summaries": "06/09/1995 The defendant was indicted for the capital murder of a police officer and use of a firearm in the commission of murder. He entered pleas of guilty on both charges and received sentences of death for the capital murder charge and three years imprisonment for the firearms charge. The defendant's appeal of the imposition of the death penalty is considered along with the automatic review of the death sentence to which he is entitled under Code \u00a7 17.110.1. No reversible error is found among the issues presented the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.",
-    "case_name_shorts": "Royal"
+    "docket_numbers": "1230172_20231012",
+    "summaries": "10/12/2023 On a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting that the Virginia Department of Corrections (?VDOC?) failed to timely release the petitioner from prison because it undercalculated his earned sentence credits (?ESCs?), pursuant to amendments to Code \u00a7 53.1-202.3 adopted by the General Assembly in 2020, the judgment of the circuit court concluding that he was not entitled to immediate release is affirmed.",
+    "case_name_shorts": "Anderson"
   }
 ]