A. Any person 18 years of age or older who, except as provided in § 18.2-370, maintains a custodial or supervisory relationship over a child under the age of 18 and is not legally married to such child and such child is not emancipated who, with lascivious intent, knowingly and intentionally (i) proposes that any such child feel or fondle the sexual or genital parts of such person or that such person feel or handle the sexual or genital parts of the child; or (ii) proposes to such child the performance of an act of sexual intercourse, anal intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, or anilingus or any act constituting an offense under § 18.2-361; or (iii) exposes his or her sexual or genital parts to such child; or (iv) proposes that any such child expose his or her sexual or genital parts to such person; or (v) proposes to the child that the child engage in sexual intercourse, sodomy or fondling of sexual or genital parts with another person; or (vi) sexually abuses the child as defined in subdivision 6 of § 18.2-67.10 is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
B. Any person who is convicted of a second or subsequent violation of this section is guilty of a Class 5 felony, provided that (i) the offenses were not part of a common act, transaction or scheme; (ii) the accused was at liberty as defined in § 53.1-151 between each conviction; and (iii) it is admitted, or found by the jury or judge before whom the person is tried, that the accused was previously convicted of a violation of this section.
1982, c. 521; 1986, c. 503; 1991, c. 517; 2001, c. 840; 2005, c. 185; 2014, c. 794.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
138
cases (
32 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case:
Moyer v. Commonwealth, 531 S.E.2d 580 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
Moyer v. Commonwealth, 531 S.E.2d 580 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 64× “Moyer (appellant) was convicted in a bench trial on fourteen counts of taking indecent liberties with a minor pursuant to Code § 18.2-370.1. On appeal, he contends the trial court erroneously ruled that (1) police seizure of his personal journals pursuant to a search warrant and…”
Robert Allen Hutton v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 750 (Va. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 22× “Although Code § 18.2-370.1 is unambiguous, it does not define the word “supervisory,” nor does a definition for the term appear elsewhere in Title 18.”
Nobrega v. Com., 628 S.E.2d 922 (Va. 2006).
· cites it 14× “2-61, and two counts of sexual abuse of the same child over whom he maintained a custodial or supervisory relationship, Code § 18.2-370.1. Nobrega v. Commonwealth, Record No.”
Guda v. Commonwealth, 592 S.E.2d 748 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 16× “A jury convicted Ty Chandler Guda of taking indecent liberties with a child by a person in a custodial or supervisory relationship, in violation of Code § 18.2-370.1. On appeal, he contends that the evidence was insufficient to find that he maintained a “custodial or supervisory…”
Quyen Vinh Phan Le v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 774 S.E.2d 475 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 13× “In two separate bench trials, Quyen Vinh Phan Le (“appellant”) was convicted of three counts of custodial indecent liberties in violation of Code § 18.2-370.1. Appellant was found guilty of one count of custodial indecent liberties against C.”
McCabe v. Com., 650 S.E.2d 508 (Va. 2007).
· cites it 20× “Terri Hackley McCabe was convicted in 1997 of a violation of Code § 18.2-370.1. Because of this conviction, she was required to register as a sex offender pursuant to the provisions of former Code § 19.”
Kolesnikoff v. Commonwealth, 679 S.E.2d 559 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 23× “Following a bench trial, Nicholai Kolesnikoff (“appellant”) was convicted of custodial indecent liberties, in violation of Code § 18.2-370.1. On appeal, he contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment or, in the alternative, to remand the case…”
Sadler v. Com., 667 S.E.2d 783 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 16× “In this appeal, Charles Timothy Sadler asks this Court to reverse his conviction for taking indecent liberties with a minor with whom he maintained a custodial or supervisory relationship, Code § 18.2-370.1, because he was not engaged in the activity that gave rise to the…”
DeAmicis v. Commonwealth, 524 S.E.2d 151 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 28× “Michael Joseph DeAmicis (defendant) was convicted in a bench trial for taking indecent liberties with a minor, a felony, in violation of Code § 18.2-370.1, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a misdemeanor, in violation of Code § 18.”
Snow v. Commonwealth, 537 S.E.2d 6 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 14× “2d 276 (1999), we addressed a similar statute, Code § 18.2-370.1. *772 That statute punishes persons who take indecent liberties with a child, under the age of eighteen, over which they have a “custodial or supervisory relationship.”
Sadler v. Commonwealth, 654 S.E.2d 313 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 24× “See Code § 18.2-370.1. On appeal, Sadler contends the evidence was insufficient to prove that at the time of the offense he was in either a custodial or supervisory relationship with the victim.”
Moyer v. Commonwealth, 520 S.E.2d 371 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 56× “On appeal, Moyer claims the police seized his personal journals in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and that the trial judge entered into evidence excerpts of those journals in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(A) — 29 cases
Robert Allen Hutton v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 750 (Va. Ct. App. 2016).
“Although Code § 18.2-370.1 is unambiguous, it does not define the word “supervisory,” nor does a definition for the term appear elsewhere in Title 18.”
Nobrega v. Com., 628 S.E.2d 922 (Va. 2006).
“2-61, and two counts of sexual abuse of the same child over whom he maintained a custodial or supervisory relationship, Code § 18.2-370.1. Nobrega v. Commonwealth, Record No.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(A)(i) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(A)(ii) — 2 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(A)(iii) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(A)(v) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(A)(vi) — 8 cases
Sadler v. Commonwealth, 654 S.E.2d 313 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
“See Code § 18.2-370.1. On appeal, Sadler contends the evidence was insufficient to prove that at the time of the offense he was in either a custodial or supervisory relationship with the victim.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(iii) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-370.1(vi) — 1 case
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.