Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-272 (2026)

Driving after forfeiture of license

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Any person who drives or operates any motor vehicle on any highway, as defined in § 46.2-100, in the Commonwealth, or any engine or train in the Commonwealth, during the time for which he was deprived of the right to do so (i) upon conviction of a violation of § 18.2-268.3 or 46.2-341.26:3 or of an offense set forth in subsection E of § 18.2-270, (ii) by § 18.2-271 or 46.2-391.2, (iii) after his license has been revoked pursuant to § 46.2-389 or 46.2-391, or (iv) in violation of the terms of a restricted license issued pursuant to subsection E of § 18.2-271.1, subsection C of § 18.2-270.1, or subsection E of § 18.2-270.1, as it shall become effective on July 1, 2021, is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor except as otherwise provided in § 46.2-391, and is subject to administrative revocation of his driver's license pursuant to §§ 46.2-389 and 46.2-391. Any person convicted of three violations of this section committed within a 10-year period is guilty of a Class 6 felony.

Nothing in this section or § 18.2-266, 18.2-270, or 18.2-271 shall be construed as conflicting with or repealing any ordinance or resolution of any county, city, or town that restricts still further the right of such persons to drive or operate any such vehicle or conveyance.

B. Regardless of compliance with any other restrictions on his privilege to drive or operate a motor vehicle, it shall be a violation of this section for any person whose privilege to drive or operate a motor vehicle has been restricted, suspended or revoked because of a violation of § 18.2-36.1, 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, 18.2-268.3, 46.2-341.24, or 46.2-341.26:3 or a similar ordinance or law of another state or the United States to drive or operate a motor vehicle on any highway, as defined in § 46.2-100, in the Commonwealth while he has a blood alcohol content of 0.02 percent or more.

Any person suspected of a violation of this subsection shall be entitled to a preliminary breath test in accordance with the provisions of § 18.2-267, shall be deemed to have given his implied consent to have samples of his blood, breath or both taken for analysis pursuant to the provisions of § 18.2-268.2, and, when charged with a violation of this subsection, shall be subject to the provisions of §§ 18.2-268.1 through 18.2-268.12.

C. Any person who drives or operates a motor vehicle on any highway, as defined in § 46.2-100, in the Commonwealth without a certified ignition interlock system as required by § 46.2-391.01 is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor and is subject to administrative revocation of his driver's license pursuant to §§ 46.2-389 and 46.2-391.

D. Any person who drives or operates a motor vehicle who has tampered with, or in any way attempted to circumvent the operation of, a remote alcohol monitoring device that an offender is ordered to use under § 18.2-270.1 is not guilty of a violation of this section but is guilty of a violation of subsection H of § 18.2-270.1.

Code 1950, § 18.1-60; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1988, c. 859; 1991, c. 64; 2004, cc. 948, 1013; 2005, cc. 757, 840; 2006, c. 390; 2007, c. 258; 2009, cc. 71, 255; 2017, c. 623; 2020, cc. 1007, 1019.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 47 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Richard Daniel Peters, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 764 (Va. Ct. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Richard Daniel Peters, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 764 (Va. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 22× “, appeals his conviction for driving “during the time for which he was deprived of the right to do so,” third or subsequent offense, in violation of Code § 18.2-272. He argues that the Commonwealth failed to prove that he had received notice of the revocation of his driving…”

Stevens v. Commonwealth, 616 S.E.2d 754 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “In 2004, the General Assembly added Code § 18.2-272 to most of the statutes cited above; see Va.”

Dixon v. Com., 613 S.E.2d 398 (Va. 2005). · cites it 4× “Before trial in the circuit court, Dixon filed a motion to suppress certain statements he made to the arresting officer, claiming a violation of his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution and Code of…”

Jacob Lynn Patterson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 749 S.E.2d 538 (Va. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 5× “1, or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance within three hours of the alleged offense.”

Stevens v. Commonwealth, 603 S.E.2d 642 (Va. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “1 is a definitional statute, Code § 18.2-268.6 refers back to Code § 18.2-268.”

Roseborough v. Commonwealth, 688 S.E.2d 882 (Va. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “1, or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance within three hours of the alleged offense.”

Travis v. Commonwealth, 457 S.E.2d 420 (Va. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 4× “SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE We also hold that sufficient evidence proved that appellant was driving in violation of Code § 46.”

Kozmina v. Com., 706 S.E.2d 860 (Va. 2011). “1 [unlawful for a person under the age of 21 to operate a motor vehicle after illegally consuming alcohol], or subsection B of § 18.2-272 [driving after forfeiture of license] or of a similar ordinance to unreasonably refuse to have samples of his blood or breath or both blood…”

Reynolds v. Commonwealth, 515 S.E.2d 808 (Va. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “2-266, and driving in violation of the terms of a restricted license, in violation of Code § 18.2-272. He contends the trial court erred in admitting the certificate of *156 breath analysis because the police officer’s training did not comply with statutory mandates.”

Yap v. Commonwealth, 643 S.E.2d 523 (Va. Ct. App. 2007). “2-272 or a similar ordinance, the admission of the blood or breath test results shall not limit the introduction of any other relevant evidence bearing upon any question at issue before the court, and the court shall, regardless of the result of any blood or breath tests,…”

Wilson v. Commonwealth, 609 S.E.2d 612 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). “1 or § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance within three hours of the alleged offense.”

Beverly Dandridge Sprouse v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 673 S.E.2d 481 (Va. Ct. App. 2009). “1, or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance within three hours of the alleged offense.”

Show all 47 citing cases →

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-272(A) — 5 cases

Richard Daniel Peters, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 764 (Va. Ct. App. 2016). “, appeals his conviction for driving “during the time for which he was deprived of the right to do so,” third or subsequent offense, in violation of Code § 18.2-272. He argues that the Commonwealth failed to prove that he had received notice of the revocation of his driving…”

Yoder v. Commonwealth (ORDER) (Va. 2019).

Michelle Dawn Yoder v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2018).

Gregory Lynn McMillan v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2020).

Curtis Benjamin Harrell, III v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2024).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-272(A)(i) — 1 case

Billy Fernandes Ray v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2026).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-272(B) — 3 cases

Jacob Lynn Patterson v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 749 S.E.2d 538 (Va. Ct. App. 2013). “1, or subsection B of § 18.2-272 or of a similar ordinance within three hours of the alleged offense.”

China Michael-Lee Coleman v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2026).

Samuel Ellis, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2022).

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.