Any person who shall take, drive or use any animal, aircraft, vehicle, boat or vessel, not his own, without the consent of the owner thereof and in the absence of the owner, and with intent temporarily to deprive the owner thereof of his possession thereof, without intent to steal the same, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony, provided, however, that if the value of such animal, aircraft, vehicle, boat or vessel shall be less than $1,000, such person shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. The consent of the owner of an animal, aircraft, vehicle, boat or vessel to its taking, driving or using shall not in any case be presumed or implied because of such owner's consent on a previous occasion to the taking, driving or using of such animal, aircraft, vehicle, boat or vessel by the same or a different person. Any person who assists in, or is a party or accessory to, or an accomplice in, any such unauthorized taking, driving or using shall be subject to the same punishment as if he were the principal offender.
Code 1950, § 18.1-164; 1960, c. 358; 1970, c. 8; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1981, c. 197; 2018, cc. 764, 765; 2020, cc. 89, 401.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
40
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case:
McDuffie v. Commonwealth, 638 S.E.2d 139 (Va. Ct. App. 2006).
McDuffie v. Commonwealth, 638 S.E.2d 139 (Va. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 10× “1 Code § 18.2-102 prohibits the unauthorized use of, inter alia, a motor vehicle “not his own, without the consent of the owner” by an individual.”
Montague v. Commonwealth, 579 S.E.2d 667 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 10× “Montague (appellant) was convicted in a bench trial of unauthorized use of an automobile, in violation of Code § 18.2-102. On appeal, he argues the trial court erred in finding the evidence was sufficient to convict.”
Tucker v. Com., 604 S.E.2d 66 (Va. 2004).
· cites it 14× “Tucker was indicted by a grand jury in the City of Portsmouth for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, in violation of Code § 18.2-102. After a bench trial, the circuit court convicted Tucker of the offense and sentenced him to two years' imprisonment, with a portion of that…”
Overstreet v. Commonwealth, 435 S.E.2d 906 (Va. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 12× “Carlton Alford Overstreet (Overstreet) appeals from his conviction pursuant to Code § 18.2-102 for the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle.”
Mounce v. Commonwealth, 357 S.E.2d 742 (Va. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 4× “David Mounce was convicted of felonious unauthorized use of a 1978 Monte Carlo automobile in violation of Code § 18.2-102. He now contends that: (1) the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to prove that the value of the automobile was over $200; and (2) the evidence was…”
Taylor v. Commonwealth, 708 S.E.2d 241 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 6× “INTRODUCTION Appealing his conviction for unauthorized use of an automobile in violation of Code § 18.2-102, Mikeema Taylor argues (1) the evidence was insufficient to show he knew his use was unauthorized and (2) the evidence was insufficient to prove venue.”
Allen v. Commonwealth, 501 S.E.2d 441 (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 8× “Allen was indicted for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle in violation of Code § 18.2-102. Prior to trial, Allen pleaded not guilty.”
Tarpley v. Commonwealth, 542 S.E.2d 761 (Va. 2001).
· cites it 2× “He contends that if he “committed any criminal act at all, it was unauthorized use of an automobile,” in violation of Code § 18.2-102, by temporarily depriving Bruce of the use of his car.”
McEachern v. Commonwealth, 667 S.E.2d 343 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 3× “He concludes with the assertion that the evidence “merely supported a conviction for the lesser-included offense [of] unauthorized use of an automobile under Va.Code § 18.2-102.” Appellant’s Br. at 14.”
Brenda Marie Fleisher v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 822 S.E.2d 679 (Va. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “Brenda Marie Fleisher (“appellant”) was convicted of felony unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, in violation of Code § 18.2-102. She contends that the court abused its discretion by imposing a sentence which included an amount of restitution that exceeded the loss “caused by…”
Dalton v. Commonwealth, 512 S.E.2d 142 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “" Additionally, *152 Code § 18.2-102 provides that one who is an "accessory to" the unauthorized use of a vehicle "shall be subject to the same punishment as if he were the principal offender.”
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.