If any person without authority of law goes upon or remains upon the lands, buildings or premises of another, or any portion or area thereof, after having been forbidden to do so, either orally or in writing, by the owner, lessee, custodian, or the agent of any such person, or other person lawfully in charge thereof, or after having been forbidden to do so by a sign or signs posted by or at the direction of such persons or the agent of any such person or by the holder of any easement or other right-of-way authorized by the instrument creating such interest to post such signs on such lands, structures, premises or portion or area thereof at a place or places where it or they may be reasonably seen, or if any person, whether he is the owner, tenant or otherwise entitled to the use of such land, building or premises, goes upon, or remains upon such land, building or premises after having been prohibited from doing so by a court of competent jurisdiction by an order issued pursuant to §§ 16.1-253, 16.1-253.1, 16.1-253.4, 16.1-278.2 through 16.1-278.6, 16.1-278.8, 16.1-278.14, 16.1-278.15, 16.1-279.1, 19.2-152.8, 19.2-152.9 or § 19.2-152.10 or an ex parte order issued pursuant to § 20-103, and after having been served with such order, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. This section shall not be construed to affect in any way the provisions of §§ 18.2-132 through 18.2-136.
Code 1950, § 18.1-173; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1982, c. 169; 1987, cc. 625, 705; 1991, c. 534; 1998, cc. 569, 684; 2011, c. 195.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
95
cases (
19 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case:
Baker v. Com., 685 S.E.2d 661 (Va. 2009).
Baker v. Com., 685 S.E.2d 661 (Va. 2009).
· cites it 25× “Ernest Baker was convicted at a bench trial in the Circuit Court of the City of Petersburg of trespassing in violation of Code § 18.2-119. [1] Baker appealed his conviction to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed his conviction in an unpublished opinion.”
Raab v. Commonwealth, 652 S.E.2d 144 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 12× “He then cited the general trespassing statute, Code § 18.2-119, arguing that there can be no reasonable suspicion of trespassing here because the posted signs did not expressly say "no trespassing.”
Kim v. Commonwealth, 797 S.E.2d 766 (Va. 2017).
· cites it 10× “Code § 18.2-119 establishes that a "No Trespassing" sign, posted in a location "where it may be reasonably seen," prohibits individuals "without authority of law" from entering or remaining upon "the lands, buildings or premises of another, or any portion or area thereof.”
Commonwealth v. Hicks, 596 S.E.2d 74 (Va. 2004).
· cites it 14× “He appeared in the City of Richmond General District Court on June 26, 1998, and he was convicted of trespass in violation of Code § 18.2-119. On January 20, 1999, Richmond Police officer, James Laino, was driving his police cruiser in the Whitcomb Court housing development.”
McCracken v. Commonwealth, 572 S.E.2d 493 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 8× “[1] Before opening the screen door, the deputy had probable cause to believe the defendant was trespassing, Code § 18.2-119. [2] The deputies responded to the initial domestic disturbance call because Teresa Fields wanted the defendant removed from her house.”
Lowe v. Commonwealth, 535 S.E.2d 689 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 34× “2-51 and trespass in violation of Code § 18.2-119. 1 On appeal, he contends (1) his first conviction was for unlawful rather than malicious wounding, as per the trial court’s sentencing order, and, therefore, that the sentence imposed exceeded the statutory range; and (2) his…”
O'Banion v. Commonwealth, 531 S.E.2d 599 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 20× “O'Banion ("appellant") for trespassing and possessing a concealed weapon, in contravention of Code §§ 18.2-119 and 18.2-308.2, respectively.”
Miller v. Commonwealth, 393 S.E.2d 431 (Va. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 48× “Anthony Miller was convicted in a bench trial of trespass in violation of Code § 18.2-119. The sole issue on appeal is whether Code § 18.”
Commonwealth v. Hicks, 563 S.E.2d 674 (Va. 2002).
· cites it 12× “Kevin Lamont Hicks was charged with trespass in violation of Code § 18.2-119 and three violations of the conditions of suspended sentences imposed upon him for prior trespass convictions.”
Virginia v. Hicks, 539 U.S. 113 (2003).
· cites it 2× “Persons who trespass after being notified not to return are subject to prosecution under Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-119 (1996): "If any person without authority of law goes upon or remains upon the lands, buildings or premises of another, *117 or any portion or area thereof, after…”
Joyce v. Commonwealth, 696 S.E.2d 237 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× ““Code § 18.2-119 criminalizes trespass by those who go on the property of another “without authority of law 1 after ‘having been forbidden to do so’ by a lawful possessor.”
Raab v. Commonwealth, 644 S.E.2d 78 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 16× “He then cited the general trespassing statute, Code § 18.2-119, arguing that there can be no reasonable suspicion of trespassing here because the posted sign did not expressly say "no trespassing.”
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.