Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-29 (2026)

Criminal solicitation; penalty

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Any person who commands, entreats, or otherwise attempts to persuade another person to commit a felony other than murder, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. Any person age eighteen or older who commands, entreats, or otherwise attempts to persuade another person under age eighteen to commit a felony other than murder, shall be guilty of a Class 5 felony. Any person who commands, entreats, or otherwise attempts to persuade another person to commit a murder is guilty of a felony punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for a term not less than five years or more than forty years.

1975, cc. 14, 15; 1994, cc. 364, 440; 2002, cc. 615, 635.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 59 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Singson v. Commonwealth, 621 S.E.2d 682 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Singson v. Commonwealth, 621 S.E.2d 682 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 18× “Appellant Joel Dulay Singson (“Singson”) appeals his conviction, following a conditional guilty plea, for solicitation to commit oral sodomy, in violation of Code §§ 18.2-29 (criminal solicitation) and 18.”

Branche v. Commonwealth, 489 S.E.2d 692 (Va. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 18× “In this criminal appeal, the defendant challenges the constitutionality of the statutory scheme found in Code §§ 18.2-29 and 18.2-346.Code § 18.2-29 provides that a person who solicits another to commit a felony, in this case oral sodomy, 1 is guilty of a Class 6 felony.”

Adam Toghill v. Harold Clarke, 877 F.3d 547 (4th Cir. 2017). · cites it 7× “2013), granting habeas relief to a Virginia inmate who had been convicted of criminal solicitation of a 17-year-old minor to commit a felony, see Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-29 (2002), namely sodomy under Va.”

Ostrander v. Commonwealth, 658 S.E.2d 346 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 16× “On appeal, appellant contends his prosecution for attempted murder for hire was barred on double jeopardy grounds by his guilty plea to the solicitation to commit murder offense.”

Ford v. Commonwealth, 391 S.E.2d 603 (Va. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 10× “Darnell Ford was convicted in a bench trial of solicitation of oral sodomy in violation of Code § 18.2-29. On appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction.”

Billips v. Commonwealth, 630 S.E.2d 340 (Va. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “Matthew Edward Billips appeals the sentences imposed by the trial judge following Billips's conviction in a jury trial of criminal solicitation, in violation of Code § 18.2-29, and two counts of forcible sodomy, in violation of Code § 18.”

Huffman v. Commonwealth, 284 S.E.2d 837 (Va. 1981). · cites it 6× “In a bench trial the court convicted Kathryn Coake Huffman of criminal solicitation in violation of Code § 18.2-29. In this appeal she argues that the evidence is insufficient to convict because the intended victim was not specifically named or otherwise sufficiently identified.”

Golden v. Commonwealth, 519 S.E.2d 378 (Va. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 6× “3 The Commonwealth, nevertheless, insists that the arrest and related search of defendant were valid because police also possessed probable cause to arrest her for solieita *624 tion to commit oral sodomy, in violation of Code § 18.2-29. 4 The Commonwealth reasons, “an arrest…”

Bloom v. Commonwealth, 554 S.E.2d 84 (Va. 2001). · cites it 2× “2-26 and -370(5), and (2) solicitation to commit sodomy, in violation of Code § 18.2-29. The jury fixed Bloom’s punishment at 12 months in jail for each offense.”

Arthur Anderson Warren v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 822 S.E.2d 395 (Va. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “So viewed, the evidence established that, in October of 2016, Warren videotaped on his cellphone encounters he had with 1 In pertinent part, Code § 18.2-29 provides that “[a]ny person who commands, entreats, or otherwise attempts to persuade another person to commit a felony…”

Ashford v. Commonwealth, 626 S.E.2d 464 (Va. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “2-31, and solicitation of capital murder for hire, in violation of Code §§ 18.2-29 and 18.2-31. Appellant contends that (1) his actions did not amount to the requisite “overt act” necessary to be convicted of attempted capital murder for hire, and (2) the presentation of both…”

DePriest v. Commonwealth, 537 S.E.2d 1 (Va. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “These ten consolidated appeals are from judgments of conviction in the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke for solicitation to commit oral sodomy in violation of Code §§ 18.2-29 and 18.2-361. 1 The appellants contend that the trial court erred in ruling that Code § 18.”

Show all 59 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.