Va. Code » Title 18.2. Crimes and Offenses Generally » Chapter 2. Principals and Accessories
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-19 (2026)

How accessories after the fact punished; certain exceptions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every accessory after the fact is guilty of (i) a Class 6 felony in the case of a homicide offense that is punishable as a Class 1 or Class 2 felony or (ii) a Class 1 misdemeanor in the case of any other felony. However, no person in the relation of spouse, parent or grandparent, child or grandchild, or sibling, by consanguinity or affinity, or servant to the offender, who, after the commission of a felony, aids or assists a principal felon or accessory before the fact to avoid or escape from prosecution or punishment, shall be deemed an accessory after the fact.

Code 1950, §§ 18.1-11, 18.1-12; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 2014, c. 668; 2020, c. 900; 2021, Sp. Sess. I, cc. 344, 345.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Dalton v. Commonwealth, 512 S.E.2d 142 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dalton v. Commonwealth, 512 S.E.2d 142 (Va. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 12× “Rather, Code § 18.2-19 "retains the separate offense of accessory after the fact, defined as any non-excepted person, `who, after the commission of a felony, shall aid or assist a principal felon or accessory before the fact to avoid or escape from prosecution or punishment.”
Chezmin Brittany Suter v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 796 S.E.2d 416 (Va. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 12× “HUMPHREYS Chezmin Brittany Suter (“Suter”) appeals the November 10, 2015 decision by the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach (the “trial court”) convicting her of one count of accessory after the fact to murder, in violation of Code § 18.2-19. 1 Suter’s single assignment…”
Dalton v. Commonwealth, 499 S.E.2d 22 (Va. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 12× “" Thus, the crime of being an accessory after the fact is an independent crime, see Code § 18.2-19, and is codified under a separate statute.”
Jean Pugin v. Merrick Garland, 19 F. 4th 437 (4th Cir. 2021). · cites it 2× “Va. Code § 18.2-19. But Pugin does not contest that the “term of imprisonment” for this misdemeanor was “at least one year” as required to qualify as an aggravated felony under federal law.”
Turner v. Commonwealth, 680 S.E.2d 312 (Va. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “*329 Code § 18.2-19 defines the crime of accessory after the fact as a Class 1 misdemeanor.”
Powell v. Commonwealth, 521 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “At the conclusion of the Commonwealth’s evidence, the trial court struck the grand larceny charge but allowed the case to proceed on a charge of accessory after the fact to a grand larceny, a violation of Code § 18.2-19. On appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred in…”
Heywood v. Virginia Peninsula Reg'l Jail Auth., 217 F. Supp. 3d 896 (E.D. Va. 2016). “49, at 6 n.2. Heywood’s Second Amended Complaint, filed August 11, 2016, raises fourteen (14) claims: (1) a § 1983 claim against VPRJA; (2) a § 1983 claim against Koehler; (3) an Assault claim against Koehler; (4) an Assault claim against VPRJA under the theory of Respondeat…”
Williams v. Commonwealth (Va. 2023). · cites it 6× “BACKGROUND Williams was arrested on the charge of accessory after the fact of a homicide, in violation of Code § 18.2-19, a felony. A grand jury indicted her on that charge.”
Williams v. Commonwealth (Va. 2023). · cites it 6× “BACKGROUND Williams was arrested on the charge of accessory after the fact of a homicide, in violation of Code § 18.2-19, a felony. A grand jury indicted her on that charge.”
Jean Pugin v. Merrick Garland (4th Cir. 2022). · cites it 2× “Va. Code § 18.2-19. But Pugin does not contest that the “term of imprisonment” for this misdemeanor was “at least one year” as required to qualify as an aggravated felony under federal law.”
Stephen James Hood v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “On the date of Hood’s conviction, Code § 18.2-19 established that the crime of being an accessory after the fact to abduction was punished as a misdemeanor.”
Melvin Edgardo Molina-Ramos, s/k/a Melvin Edgar Molina-Romas v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “Although Code § 18.2-19 sets out the punishment for the offense of accessory after the fact, the definition of the offense comes from the common law.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.