A. Any person who, as a result of driving while intoxicated in violation of § 18.2-266 or any local ordinance substantially similar thereto in a manner so gross, wanton, and culpable as to show a reckless disregard for human life, unintentionally causes the serious bodily injury of another person is guilty of a Class 6 felony.
B. Any person who, as a result of driving while intoxicated in violation of § 18.2-266 or any local ordinance substantially similar thereto in a manner so gross, wanton, and culpable as to show a reckless disregard for human life, unintentionally causes the serious bodily injury of another person resulting in permanent and significant physical impairment is guilty of a Class 4 felony.
C. The driver's license of any person convicted under this section shall be revoked pursuant to subsection B of § 46.2-391.
D. The provisions of Article 2 (§ 18.2-266 et seq.) of Chapter 7 shall apply, mutatis mutandis, upon arrest for a violation of this section.
E. As used in this section, "serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that involves substantial risk of death, extreme physical pain, protracted and obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty.
1997, c. 691; 1999, cc. 945, 987; 2000, cc. 956, 982; 2019, c. 465.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
36
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1999–2024 · leading case:
Stevens v. Commonwealth, 616 S.E.2d 754 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
Stevens v. Commonwealth, 616 S.E.2d 754 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 12× “3 applies its provisions to an additional statute, specifically, Code § 18.2-51.4, maiming as a result of driving while intoxicated.”
Riley v. Com., 675 S.E.2d 168 (Va. 2009).
· cites it 6× “2-266 and maiming another person as a result of driving while intoxicated in violation of Code § 18.2-51.4. The primary issue in this appeal is whether Riley met his burden to present evidence sufficient to establish the affirmative defense of unconsciousness predicated upon…”
Ratliff v. Commonwealth, 672 S.E.2d 913 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 22× “Code § 18.2-51.4 states in relevant part: “Any person who, as a result of driving while intoxicated in violation of § 18.”
Stevens v. Commonwealth, 603 S.E.2d 642 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 8× “3 also specifies that a prosecution for refusal to submit to a blood test is available under a prosecution for maiming a person as a result of driving while *648 intoxicated pursuant to Code § 18.2-51.4. It is important to note that Code § 18.”
Thomas Tyler Wright v. Commonwealth, 576 S.E.2d 242 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 10× “Thomas Tyler Wright appeals his conviction, after a bench trial, for maiming, in violation of Code § 18.2-51.4. 1 Wright contends the trial court erred in finding the evidence sufficient to establish that he drove in a manner so gross, wanton and culpable as to show a reckless…”
Crystal Ann Coomer v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 797 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “In Rich, Rich was convicted of driving under the influence where the victim was permanently impaired (“DUI maiming”), in violation of Code § 18.2-51.4. Id. While not felony child neglect, DUI maiming also requires a finding of criminal negligence.”
Bristol v. Commonwealth, 636 S.E.2d 460 (Va. 2006).
· cites it 2× “2-266, and for maiming another as a result of driving under the influence, in violation of Code § 18.2-51.4. At a bench trial, the Commonwealth offered in evidence a certificate of analysis of Bristol's blood alcohol content (BAC) to establish a rebuttable presumption under Code…”
Oliver v. Commonwealth, 577 S.E.2d 514 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “3(A) provided: If a person, after having been arrested for a violation of §§ 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266 or § 18.2-266.1 or of a similar ordinance and after having been advised by the arresting officer that a person who operates a motor vehicle upon a public highway in this Commonwealth…”
Bristol v. Commonwealth, 612 S.E.2d 244 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “2-266 and of maiming another person while driving under the influence of alcohol in violation of Code § 18.2-51.4. At trial, the Commonwealth introduced into evidence a certificate of blood analysis to establish a rebuttable presumption that Bristol was intoxicated at the time…”
Bristol v. Commonwealth, 625 S.E.2d 676 (Va. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 8× “2-266, and maiming another person while driving under the influence of alcohol, in violation of Code § 18.2-51.4. At trial, the Commonwealth introduced into evidence a certificate of blood analysis to establish a rebuttable presumption that Bristol was intoxicated at the time of…”
Lamay v. Commonwealth, 513 S.E.2d 411 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
“If a person, after having been arrested for a violation of §§ 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266 or § 18.2-266.1 or of a similar ordinance and after having been advised by the arresting officer that a person who operates a motor vehicle upon a public highway in this Commonwealth is deemed…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-51.4(A) — 2 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-51.4(B) — 3 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-51.4(D) — 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.