A. It shall be unlawful for a person confined in a state, local or regional correctional facility as defined in § 53.1-1; in a secure facility or detention home as defined in § 16.1-228 or in any facility designed for the secure detention of juveniles; or while in the custody of an employee thereof to knowingly and willfully inflict bodily injury on:
1. An employee thereof, or
2. Any other person lawfully admitted to such facility, except another prisoner or person held in legal custody, or
3. Any person who is supervising or working with prisoners or persons held in legal custody, or
4. Any such employee or other person while such prisoner or person held in legal custody is committing any act in violation of § 53.1-203.
B. It shall be unlawful for an accused, probationer or parolee under the supervision of, or being investigated by, (i) a probation or parole officer whose powers and duties are defined in § 16.1-237 or § 53.1-145, (ii) a local pretrial services officer associated with an agency established pursuant to Article 5 (§ 19.2-152.2) of Chapter 9 of Title 19.2, or (iii) a local community-based probation officer associated with an agency established pursuant to Article 9 (§ 9.1-173 et seq.) of Chapter 1 of Title 9.1, to knowingly and willfully inflict bodily injury on such officer while he is in the performance of his duty, knowing or having reason to know that the officer is engaged in the performance of his duty.
Any person violating any provision of this section is guilty of a Class 5 felony.
1975, cc. 14, 15; 1977, c. 553; 1982, c. 636; 1985, c. 508; 1996, c. 527; 1999, cc. 618, 658; 2001, cc. 818, 848; 2007, c. 133.
Notes of Decisions
Nicholas David Pelloni v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 781 S.E.2d 368 (Va. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 6× “In the only other statute to use the phrase "willfully inflict,’' Code § 18.2-55 proscribes the "knowing [] and willful [] infliction of] *739 bodily injury” on another person by a prison inmate.”
Seegars v. Commonwealth, 445 S.E.2d 720 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 8× “Seegars (appellant) was convicted in a jury trial of injuring a correctional officer while an inmate of a state penal institution in violation of Code § 18.2-55. 1 Appellant *643 contends that the trial court erred by refusing to remove his leg shackles prior to trial and by…”
Caldwell v. Commonwealth, 269 S.E.2d 811 (Va. 1980).
· cites it 6× “If they found him guilty, the clerk continued, “the following is the law”, and the clerk then read in full Code §§ 18.2-55 1 and 53-291 2 to which reference was made in the indictment.”
Leathio Williams v. Commonwealth, 466 S.E.2d 754 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 8× “On February 7, 1995, a panel of this Court reversed and remanded the conviction of Leathio Williams (appellant) for violation of Code § 18.2-55 (knowingly and willfully inflicting bodily injury on an employee of a correctional facility).”
United States v. Donald Covington, 880 F.3d 129 (4th Cir. 2018).
“2017) (concluding that the “ ‘knowingly and willfully inflicting] bodily injury’ on another person” element of a Virginia criminal offense “squarely matches ACCA’s force clause, which requires force that is ‘capable of causing physical pain or injury”’ (alteration in original)…”
Wild v. Commonwealth, 446 S.E.2d 626 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 4× “On appeal from his conviction of inflicting bodily injury upon a correctional officer while an inmate of a state correctional facility in violation of Code § 18.2-55, Peter J. Wild contends (1) that because the Department of Corrections punished him administratively for the…”
Holliday v. Commonwealth, 352 S.E.2d 362 (Va. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “Rico Holliday was tried and convicted on July 24, 1985, pursuant to the provisions of Code § 18.2-55 for causing bodily injury to an employee of Mecklenburg Correctional Center.”
LeMelle v. Commonwealth, 302 S.E.2d 38 (Va. 1983).
· cites it 2× “A grand jury indicted Michael John LeMelle, an inmate in a correctional facility, for injuring an employee of that facility in violation of Code § 18.2-55. After deliberating for 27 minutes, the petit jury returned a written verdict finding defendant “guilty as charged” and…”
Williams v. Commonwealth, 453 S.E.2d 575 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 4× “Consequently, we hold that a correctional guard is disqualified per se from serving on a jury considering a charge of violating Code § 18.2-55. We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the matter to the trial court for a new trial, should the Commonwealth so elect.”
State v. Sapp, 661 S.E.2d 304 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
“Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-55 (2008). Pursuant to defendant’s guilty plea in Virginia, the court sentenced him to ten years imprisonment, with eight years and three months suspended.”
Charles Rosser v. Commonwealth, 482 S.E.2d 83 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Charles Rosser (appellant) appeals from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Greensville County (trial court) that approved his jury trial conviction for knowingly and willfully inflicting bodily injury on an employee of a correctional facility while a prisoner therein in…”
Derryl (NMN) Thompson v. Commonwealth, No. 0924052 (Va. Ct. App. May 30, 2006).
· cites it 4× “Derryl Thompson was convicted of inflicting bodily injury in violation of Code § 18.2-55. On appeal, he argues the trial judge erred in denying his motion to dismiss based upon a statutory speedy trial violation.”
Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-55(A): 3 cases
Nicholas David Pelloni v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 781 S.E.2d 368 (Va. Ct. App. 2016).
“In the only other statute to use the phrase "willfully inflict,’' Code § 18.2-55 proscribes the "knowing [] and willful [] infliction of] *739 bodily injury” on another person by a prison inmate.”
Seegars v. Commonwealth, 445 S.E.2d 720 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
“Seegars (appellant) was convicted in a jury trial of injuring a correctional officer while an inmate of a state penal institution in violation of Code § 18.2-55. 1 Appellant *643 contends that the trial court erred by refusing to remove his leg shackles prior to trial and by…”
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.