This law shall be construed liberally and as remedial in character, and the powers hereby conferred are intended to be general to effect the beneficial purposes herein set forth. It is the intention of this law that in all proceedings the welfare of the child and the family, the safety of the community and the protection of the rights of victims are the paramount concerns of the Commonwealth and to the end that these purposes may be attained, the judge shall possess all necessary and incidental powers and authority, whether legal or equitable in their nature.
This law shall be interpreted and construed so as to effectuate the following purposes:
1. To divert from or within the juvenile justice system, to the extent possible, consistent with the protection of the public safety, those children who can be cared for or treated through alternative programs;
2. To provide judicial procedures through which the provisions of this law are executed and enforced and in which the parties are assured a fair hearing and their constitutional and other rights are recognized and enforced;
3. To separate a child from such child's parents, guardian, legal custodian or other person standing in loco parentis only when the child's welfare is endangered or it is in the interest of public safety and then only after consideration of alternatives to out-of-home placement which afford effective protection to the child, his family, and the community; and
4. To protect the community against those acts of its citizens, both juveniles and adults, which are harmful to others and to reduce the incidence of delinquent behavior and to hold offenders accountable for their behavior.
Code 1950, § 16.1-140; 1956, c. 555; 1977, c. 559; 1990, c. 554; 1991, c. 392; 1996, cc. 755, 914.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
38
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case:
Brown v. Com., 688 S.E.2d 185 (Va. 2010).
Brown v. Com., 688 S.E.2d 185 (Va. 2010).
· cites it 4× “" Code § 16.1-227. In this context, the juvenile law draws a bright-line distinction between a juvenile who is fourteen years of age or older at the time of an alleged offense and is charged with an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult and a juvenile who is…”
Novak v. Commonwealth, 457 S.E.2d 402 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 4× “2d at 404 ; see Code § 16.1-227. "[C]ourts will not overturn a statutory classification on equal protection grounds unless it is so unrelated to the achievement of a legitimate purpose that it appears irrational.”
Baker v. Commonwealth, 504 S.E.2d 394 (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “” Code § 16.1-227(2). At a transfer hearing, the juvenile judge answers the “ ‘critically important’ question whether a child will be deprived of the special protections and provisions” of the juvenile court system and determines “vitally important statutory rights of the…”
J.P. v. Carter, 485 S.E.2d 162 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Code § 16.1-227. This language manifests the legislature’s intent to balance the interests of the juvenile offender with those of the community.”
Anonymous C v. Anonymous B & Albemarle Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 660 S.E.2d 307 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “The parties’ apparent stipulation to the correctness of the adjudicatory order’s findings was not binding to the extent the agreement conflicted with the court’s duty to determine what disposition would serve the best interest of the child.”
B.P. v. Commonwealth, 568 S.E.2d 412 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 8× “The circuit court found Code §§ 16.1-227 and 16.1-241(A) provide the JDR court with “interlocutory authority” to order a juvenile to attend school prior to the entry of a final disposition.”
Salvatierra v. City of Falls Church, 546 S.E.2d 214 (Va. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “8 bars the commitment of a juvenile absent a finding of delinquency on either a felony or a second Class 1 misdemeanor, (3) a juvenile probation violation does not constitute a new Class 1 misdemeanor, (4) Code § 16.1-227 does not confer upon the juvenile and domestic relations…”
Ballard v. Commonwealth, 321 S.E.2d 284 (Va. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Code § 16.1-227, part of the juvenile court law, provides that “in all proceedings the welfare of the child .”
Tross v. Commonwealth, 464 S.E.2d 523 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Code § 16.1-227. To achieve these goals, Code § 16.”
Hairfield v. Commonwealth, 376 S.E.2d 796 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “1-249(B)(1), a juvenile who has been transferred to the jurisdiction of the circuit court loses the right to be detained separate from adult offenders.”
Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-227(2): 3 cases
Baker v. Commonwealth, 504 S.E.2d 394 (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
“” Code § 16.1-227(2). At a transfer hearing, the juvenile judge answers the “ ‘critically important’ question whether a child will be deprived of the special protections and provisions” of the juvenile court system and determines “vitally important statutory rights of the…”
Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-227(3): 4 cases
Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-227(4): 4 cases
Brown v. Com., 688 S.E.2d 185 (Va. 2010).
“" Code § 16.1-227. In this context, the juvenile law draws a bright-line distinction between a juvenile who is fourteen years of age or older at the time of an alleged offense and is charged with an offense which would be a felony if committed by an adult and a juvenile who is…”
B.P. v. Commonwealth, 568 S.E.2d 412 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
“The circuit court found Code §§ 16.1-227 and 16.1-241(A) provide the JDR court with “interlocutory authority” to order a juvenile to attend school prior to the entry of a final disposition.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.