Whenever any person is in possession of any personal property, including motor vehicles or farm products, in any capacity, the title or ownership of which he has agreed in writing shall be or remain in another, or on which he has given a lien, and such person so in possession shall fraudulently sell, pledge, pawn or remove such property from the premises where it has been agreed that it shall remain, and refuse to disclose the location thereof, or otherwise dispose of the property or fraudulently remove the same from the Commonwealth, without the written consent of the owner or lienor or the person in whom the title is, or, if such writing be a deed of trust, without the written consent of the trustee or beneficiary in such deed of trust, he shall be deemed guilty of the larceny thereof.
In any prosecution hereunder, the fact that such person after demand therefor by the lienholder or person in whom the title or ownership of the property is, or his agent, shall fail or refuse to disclose to such claimant or his agent the location of the property, or to surrender the same, shall be prima facie evidence of the violation of the provisions of this section. In the case of farm products, failure to pay the proceeds of the sale of the farm products to the secured party, lienholder or person in whom the title or ownership of the property is, or his agent, within ten days after the sale or other disposition of the farm products unless otherwise agreed by the lender and borrower in the obligation of indebtedness, note or other evidence of the debt shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of the provisions of this section. The venue of prosecutions against persons fraudulently removing any such property, including motor vehicles, from the Commonwealth shall be the county or city in which such property or motor vehicle was purchased or in which the accused last had a legal residence.
This section shall not be construed to interfere with the rights of any innocent third party purchasing such property, unless such writing shall be docketed or recorded as provided by law.
Code 1950, § 18.1-116; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1986, c. 484.
Notes of Decisions
Gregory v. Commonwealth, 360 S.E.2d 858 (Va. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 19× “On October 22, 1985, Kenneth Wayne Gregory was convicted in a bench trial and sentenced to four years in the penitentiary for unlawfully and feloniously removing from the state property upon which there was a lien and disposing of it without the written consent of the lienor in…”
Delano Compton v. Commonwealth, 473 S.E.2d 95 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 32× “Following a bench trial, appellant, William Luther Delano Compton, was convicted of fraudulent conversion of property in violation of Code § 18.2-115, sentenced to three years imprisonment, all of which was suspended, and placed on three years probation.”
Lewis v. First Nat. Bank of Stuart, 645 F. Supp. 1499 (W.D. Va. 1986).
· cites it 20× “Va. Code § 18.2-115 (1982 RephVol.). California law enforcement agencies acting on behalf of the Commonwealth’s Attorney subsequently determined Lewis’s location in California.”
Goble v. Commonwealth, 698 S.E.2d 931 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× “The trial court convicted Gregory for unlawfully disposing of property upon which there was a lien without the written consent of the lienor, defined in Code § 18.2-115 as larceny. [8] Id. at 90, 91, 360 S.”
Gregory v. Commonwealth, 377 S.E.2d 405 (Va. 1989).
· cites it 4× “*355 Kenneth Wayne Gregory was convicted in the Circuit Court of Botetourt County of fraudulently disposing of property outside Virginia, upon which there was a lien given in Virginia, without the consent of the lienor, in violation of Code § 18.2-115. The Court of Appeals…”
Keselica v. Commonwealth, 480 S.E.2d 756 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 4× “2d 858 (1987), the defendant was convicted of fraudulent removal and conversion of a tractor and trailer in violation of Code § 18.2-115 (fraudulent conversion). Gregory, a resident of Botetourt County, Virginia, had earlier pledged the tractor and trailer to a Botetourt County…”
Landes v. Commonwealth, 561 S.E.2d 37 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “Sufficiency of the Evidence Code § 18.2-115 provides, in pertinent part: Whenever any person is in possession of any personal property .”
Bruhn v. Commonwealth, 559 S.E.2d 880 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “2-101, Selling of goods distrained or levied upon; § 18.2-115, Conversion or removal of property subject to lien; § 18.”
Bolden v. Commonwealth, 507 S.E.2d 84 (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “But see Code § 18.2-115 (criminalizing fraudulent disposal of property subject to lien).”
Bonner v. Commonwealth, 734 S.E.2d 692 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 14× “general venue statute in the Commonwealth, for the venue requirements applicable to the offense involved in this case.”
Michael Kelly Puckett v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 0060973 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 1998).
· cites it 9× “Michael Kelly Puckett was convicted by a jury of larceny for fraudulently removing property subject to a lien from the premises where Puckett had agreed that it would remain without the consent of the lienholder in violation of Code § 18.2-115. On appeal, he contends the…”
Nat'l Auto Sales, Inc. v. Wilson (In re Wilson), 299 B.R. 380 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2003).
“§ 18.2-115 (Michie 1996). Prior to debtor’s trial on this charge, he entered into a plea agreement under which he pled guilty to the misdemeanor crime of fraud as an accessory after the fact.”
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.