A. A person is guilty of credit card fraud when, with intent to defraud any person, he:
1. Uses for the purpose of obtaining money, goods, services, or anything else of value a credit card or credit card number obtained or retained in violation of § 18.2-192 or a credit card or credit card number which he knows is expired or revoked;
2. Obtains money, goods, services, or anything else of value by representing (i) without the consent of the cardholder that he is the holder of a specified card or credit card number or (ii) that he is the holder of a card or credit card number and such card or credit card number has not in fact been issued;
3. Obtains control over a credit card or credit card number as security for debt; or
4. Obtains money from an issuer by use of an unmanned device of the issuer or through a person other than the issuer when he knows that such advance will exceed his available credit with the issuer and any available balances held by the issuer.
B. A person who is authorized by an issuer to furnish money, goods, services, or anything else of value upon presentation of a credit card or credit card number by the cardholder, or any agent or employee of such person, is guilty of a credit card fraud when, with intent to defraud the issuer or the cardholder, he:
1. Furnishes money, goods, services, or anything else of value upon presentation of a credit card or credit card number obtained or retained in violation of § 18.2-192, or a credit card or credit card number that he knows is expired or revoked;
2. Fails to furnish money, goods, services, or anything else of value that he represents or causes to be represented in writing or by any other means to the issuer that he has furnished; or
3. Remits to an issuer or acquirer a record of a credit card or credit card number transaction that is in excess of the monetary amount authorized by the cardholder.
C. Any person who, with intent to defraud, devises a scheme to obtain a gift card or gift card redemption information from a gift card holder, gift card issuer, or gift card seller by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises is guilty of gift card fraud.
D. Conviction of credit card or gift card fraud is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor if the value of all money, goods, services, and other things of value furnished in violation of this section, or if the difference between the value of all money, goods, services, and anything else of value actually furnished and the value represented to the issuer or gift card issuer to have been furnished in violation of this section, is less than $1,000 in any six-month period; conviction of credit card or gift card fraud is punishable as a Class 6 felony if such value is $1,000 or more in any six-month period.
E. Any person who conspires, confederates, or combines with another, (i) either within or outside of the Commonwealth to commit credit card or gift card fraud within the Commonwealth or (ii) within the Commonwealth to commit credit card or gift card fraud within or outside of the Commonwealth, is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
Code 1950, § 18.1-125.6; 1968, c. 480; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1978, c. 364; 1980, c. 99; 1981, c. 197; 1985, c. 266; 1991, c. 546; 2018, cc. 764, 765; 2020, cc. 89, 401; 2026, cc. 197, 196.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
47
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case:
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 68× “3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243, CR05-1247, and CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
Raymeka Monique White v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 807 S.E.2d 242 (Va. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 13× “1, and credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. The appellant argued in her motion to strike at trial that the Commonwealth had not proved that the victim was mentally incapacitated.”
Kovalaske v. Commonwealth, 692 S.E.2d 641 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 12× “Jesse Albert Kovalaske (appellant) appeals his conviction for credit card fraud in violation of Code § 18.2-195. Appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, because the evidence did not show that he obtained the credit card without permission…”
Gheorghiu v. Com., 701 S.E.2d 407 (Va. 2010).
· cites it 4× “2-193, three counts of credit card *410 fraud in violation of Code § 18.2-195, and one count of possession of burglarious tools in violation of Code § 18.”
Saponaro v. Commonwealth, 655 S.E.2d 49 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 12× “Joseph Mario Saponaro was convicted in a bench trial for credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. On appeal, Saponaro argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to strike the evidence.”
Meeks v. Com., 651 S.E.2d 637 (Va. 2007).
· cites it 2× “2-192, and with misdemeanor credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. Only the conviction for credit card theft is the subject of this appeal.”
James Hamilton v. William Pallozzi, 848 F.3d 614 (4th Cir. 2017).
“Hamilton pleaded guilty on November 6, 2006, in Virginia to three felonies: (1) credit card fraud, in violation of Va. Code § 18.2-195; (2) credit card theft, in violation of Va.”
Johnson v. Commonwealth, 561 S.E.2d 1 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 2× “2d 648 (1993) (finding Code § 18.2-195(1), credit card fraud, creates a specific intent crime); Stuart, 11 Va.”
Duggins v. Commonwealth, 722 S.E.2d 663 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “See Code § 18.2-195. On appeal, Duggins claims his convictions should be overturned because the trial court—in a prior proceeding—erroneously allowed the Commonwealth to nolle prosequi indictments alleging identical charges.”
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 671 S.E.2d 407 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 16× “3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243 and CR05-1247 through CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
Hamilton v. Pallozzi, 165 F. Supp. 3d 315 (D. Maryland 2016).
“2-193 ; and credit-card fraud in violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195 . (ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 1, 9.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(1) — 4 cases
Johnson v. Commonwealth, 561 S.E.2d 1 (Va. Ct. App. 2002).
“2d 648 (1993) (finding Code § 18.2-195(1), credit card fraud, creates a specific intent crime); Stuart, 11 Va.”
Kovalaske v. Commonwealth, 692 S.E.2d 641 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
“Jesse Albert Kovalaske (appellant) appeals his conviction for credit card fraud in violation of Code § 18.2-195. Appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, because the evidence did not show that he obtained the credit card without permission…”
Raymeka Monique White v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 807 S.E.2d 242 (Va. Ct. App. 2017).
“1, and credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. The appellant argued in her motion to strike at trial that the Commonwealth had not proved that the victim was mentally incapacitated.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(1)(a) — 10 cases
Raymeka Monique White v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 807 S.E.2d 242 (Va. Ct. App. 2017).
“1, and credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. The appellant argued in her motion to strike at trial that the Commonwealth had not proved that the victim was mentally incapacitated.”
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243, CR05-1247, and CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
Saponaro v. Commonwealth, 655 S.E.2d 49 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
“Joseph Mario Saponaro was convicted in a bench trial for credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. On appeal, Saponaro argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to strike the evidence.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(1)(b) — 2 cases
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243, CR05-1247, and CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(1)(b)(i) — 1 case
Saponaro v. Commonwealth, 655 S.E.2d 49 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
“Joseph Mario Saponaro was convicted in a bench trial for credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195. On appeal, Saponaro argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to strike the evidence.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(3) — 7 cases
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243, CR05-1247, and CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 671 S.E.2d 407 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243 and CR05-1247 through CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(c) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(l)(a) — 2 cases
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243, CR05-1247, and CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of Code § 18.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-195(l)(b) — 1 case
Gheorghiu v. Commonwealth, 682 S.E.2d 50 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
“3 (case numbers CR05-1241 through CR05-1243, CR05-1247, and CR05-1248); three counts of credit card fraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-195 (case numbers CR06-449, CR06-451, and CR06-452); and one count of possession of burglarious tools, in violation of 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.