A. A person is guilty of the crime of computer invasion of privacy when he uses a computer or computer network and intentionally examines without authority any employment, salary, credit or any other financial or identifying information, as defined in clauses (iii) through (xiii) of subsection C of § 18.2-186.3, relating to any other person. "Examination" under this section requires the offender to review the information relating to any other person after the time at which the offender knows or should know that he is without authority to view the information displayed.
B. The crime of computer invasion of privacy shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.
C. Any person who violates this section after having been previously convicted of a violation of this section or any substantially similar laws of any other state or of the United States is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
D. Any person who violates this section and sells or distributes such information to another is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
E. Any person who violates this section and uses such information in the commission of another crime is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
F. This section shall not apply to any person collecting information that is reasonably needed to (i) protect the security of a computer, computer service, or computer business, or to facilitate diagnostics or repair in connection with such computer, computer service, or computer business or (ii) determine whether the computer user is licensed or authorized to use specific computer software or a specific computer service.
1984, c. 751; 1985, c. 398; 2001, c. 358; 2005, cc. 747, 761, 827, 837.
Notes of Decisions
Crystal Gail Ramsey v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 780 S.E.2d 624 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 21× “Crystal Gail Ramsey (“appellant”) appeals her thirteen misdemeanor convictions of computer invasion of privacy, in violation of Code § 18.2-152.5. Following a bench trial in the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk (“trial court”), appellant was sentenced to 210 days in the…”
Global Policy Partners, LLC v. Yessin, 686 F. Supp. 2d 631 (E.D. Va. 2009).
· cites it 14× “3, and Va.Code § 18.2-152.5) criminalizing unauthorized access to, or interception of, communications.”
Supinger v. Virginia, 167 F. Supp. 3d 795 (W.D. Va. 2016).
· cites it 5× “16 Section 18.2-152.5 makes it a crime to “use[] a computer or computer network and intentionally examine[ ] without authority any employment, salary, credit or any other financial or identifying information .”
Democratic Nat'l Comm. v. Russian Fed'n, 392 F. Supp. 3d 410 (S.D. Ill. 2019).
· cites it 2× “common law for trespass and conversion and claims under Virginia common law for conversion, trespass to chattels, and conspiracy to commit trespass to chattels. The primary wrongdoer in this alleged criminal enterprise is undoubtably the Russian Federation, the first named…”
S. R. v. INOVA Healthcare Servs., 49 Va. Cir. 119 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 1999).
· cites it 18× “” Va. Code § 18.2-152.5 (emphasis added). At least one scholar has concluded that the information contained in medical history files is clearly within the contemplated scope of the “personal information” protected by § 18.”
Stultz v. Virginia Dep't of Motor Vehs., 185 F. Supp. 3d 890 (W.D. Va. 2015).
· cites it 9× “Computer invasion of privacy In his final claim, Stultz alleges that Holcomb and Hill used a computer or computer network to examine records containing Stultz’s personal information, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-152.5. Section 18.2-152.5 provides, in relevant part, that…”
Lester v. Allied Concrete Co., 80 Va. Cir. 454 (Charlottesville Cir. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 4× “Under the Virginia Computer Crimes Act, Computer Fraud is defined as use of a computer or computer network without authority to either obtain property or services by false pretenses, embezzle or commit larceny, or convert the property of another. Va. Code § 18.2-152.3. Under the…”
Hains v. Adams (E.D. Va. 2019).
· cites it 14× “” Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-152.5 (A)(2019). “While [the VCCA] is a criminal statute, Virginia Code section 18.”
Albertson v. Albertson, 73 Va. Cir. 94 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 19× “” Va. Code § 18.2-152.5. “Passwords” are protected personal information identified by § 18.”
Susie M. Plasters v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 16× “Plasters had last taken this training in 1997; however, the course did not cover the prohibitions contained in Code § 18.2-152.5. The training course instructor "testified that course materials prepared for instruction given - 6 - in 1999 did address Code § 18.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-152.5(A) — 5 cases
Crystal Gail Ramsey v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 780 S.E.2d 624 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
“Crystal Gail Ramsey (“appellant”) appeals her thirteen misdemeanor convictions of computer invasion of privacy, in violation of Code § 18.2-152.5. Following a bench trial in the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk (“trial court”), appellant was sentenced to 210 days in the…”
Supinger v. Virginia, 167 F. Supp. 3d 795 (W.D. Va. 2016).
“16 Section 18.2-152.5 makes it a crime to “use[] a computer or computer network and intentionally examine[ ] without authority any employment, salary, credit or any other financial or identifying information .”
S. R. v. INOVA Healthcare Servs., 49 Va. Cir. 119 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 1999).
“” Va. Code § 18.2-152.5 (emphasis added). At least one scholar has concluded that the information contained in medical history files is clearly within the contemplated scope of the “personal information” protected by § 18.”
Stultz v. Virginia Dep't of Motor Vehs., 185 F. Supp. 3d 890 (W.D. Va. 2015).
“Computer invasion of privacy In his final claim, Stultz alleges that Holcomb and Hill used a computer or computer network to examine records containing Stultz’s personal information, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-152.5. Section 18.2-152.5 provides, in relevant part, that…”
Susie M. Plasters v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
“Plasters had last taken this training in 1997; however, the course did not cover the prohibitions contained in Code § 18.2-152.5. The training course instructor "testified that course materials prepared for instruction given - 6 - in 1999 did address Code § 18.”
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.