Except as otherwise provided in § 19.2-83.6:1, it is unlawful for any person over 16 years of age to, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in the Commonwealth without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing. However, the provisions of this section shall not apply to persons (i) wearing traditional holiday costumes; (ii) engaged in professions, trades, employment, or other activities and wearing protective masks which are deemed necessary for the physical safety of the wearer or other persons; (iii) engaged in any bona fide theatrical production or masquerade ball; or (iv) wearing a mask, hood, or other device for bona fide medical reasons upon (a) the advice of a licensed physician or osteopath and carrying on his person an affidavit from the physician or osteopath specifying the medical necessity for wearing the device and the date on which the wearing of the device will no longer be necessary and providing a brief description of the device, or (b) the declaration of a disaster or state of emergency by the Governor in response to a public health emergency where the emergency declaration expressly waives this section, defines the mask appropriate for the emergency, and provides for the duration of the waiver. The violation of any provisions of this section is a Class 6 felony.
Code 1950, §§ 18.1-364, 18.1-367; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1986, c. 19; 2010, cc. 262, 420; 2014, c. 167; 2026, c. 1131.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
39
cases (
11 in the last 5 years), 1991–2025 · leading case:
Wiggins v. Commonwealth, 622 S.E.2d 774 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
Wiggins v. Commonwealth, 622 S.E.2d 774 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 8× “1, and three counts of wearing a mask in public, in violation of Code § 18.2-422. [2] During trial, Wiggins moved to strike the three abduction charges and the three related charges for use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, arguing that the alleged abductions were not…”
Deshay Arkel Stith v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 773 S.E.2d 165 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 12× “Deshay Arkel Stith (appellant) appeals his conviction for feloniously wearing a mask in violation of Code § 18.2-422. 1 Appellant argues that the trial court erred in finding that the Commonwealth introduced sufficient evidence to support a conviction for feloniously wearing a…”
Hernandez v. Commonwealth, 406 S.E.2d 398 (Va. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 18× “In this appeal, the appellant challenges the constitutionality of Code § 18.2-422, which prohibits a person from wearing a mask in public.”
Towler v. Commonwealth, 718 S.E.2d 463 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “1, and unlawfully wearing a mask, in violation of Code § 18.2-422. 2 On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence.”
Hoyt v. Commonwealth, 605 S.E.2d 755 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “2-47(A), 2 wearing a mask in public in violation of Code § 18.2-422, two counts of robbery in violation of Code § 18.”
Commonwealth v. Williams, 553 S.E.2d 760 (Va. 2001).
· cites it 2× “1, and for unlawful wearing of a mask in violation of Code § 18.2-422. He was accused of robbing Dost M.”
McGill v. Commonwealth, 485 S.E.2d 173 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 4× “” 1 In a bench trial by the Circuit Court of the City of Norfolk (trial court), appellant was convicted of four counts of robbery, one count of attempted robbery, five counts of use of a firearm in commission of those felonies, 2 and three counts of violation of Code § 18.2-422…”
Hopson v. Commonwealth, 427 S.E.2d 221 (Va. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 4× “Hopson next contends that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he wore a mask in violation of Code § 18.2-422. He argues that the Commonwealth failed to prove whether the location of the act was public or private.”
Jarrod Antonio Spence v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 727 S.E.2d 786 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “1, and one count of unlawfully wearing a mask in public, Code § 18.2-422. Spence assigns the following errors to the judgment of the trial court: (1) the trial court abused its discretion in denying Spence’s motion for a mistrial after a particular statement by one of the…”
Rashad v. Commonwealth, 651 S.E.2d 407 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “2-91; and unlawfully wearing a mask in public, in violation of Code § 18.2-422. On appeal, he contends the trial court erred: (1) by not suppressing his statements after he invoked his right to counsel; and (2) by finding the evidence sufficient to convict him of use of a…”
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.