Va. Code » Title 19.2. Criminal Procedure » Chapter 10. Disability of Judge or Attorney for Commonwealth; Court- Appointed Counsel; Interpreters; Transcripts » Article 1. Disability of Judge
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-154 (2026)

Death or disability of judge during trial; how another judge procured to continue with trial

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If by reason of death, sickness or other disability the judge who presided at a criminal jury trial is unable to proceed with and finish the trial, another judge of that court or a judge designated by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or by a justice designated by him for that purpose, may proceed with and finish the trial or, in his discretion, may grant and preside at a new trial. If by reason of such disability, the judge who presided at any trial is unable to perform the duties to be performed by the court after a finding of guilty by the jury or the court, another judge of that court, or a judge designated as provided in the preceding sentence, may perform those duties or, in his discretion, may grant and preside at a new trial. Before proceeding with the trial or performing such duties, such judge shall certify that he has familiarized himself with the record of the trial.

1975, c. 495.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Andrews v. Com., 699 S.E.2d 237 (Va. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Andrews v. Com., 699 S.E.2d 237 (Va. 2010). · cites it 2× “Citing Code § 19.2-154, Andrews contended in the alternative that either Judge Alston's elevation to the Court of Appeals would not qualify as a disability barring him from continuing to preside over the case or that if he was so barred, given the unique circumstances of a jury…”
Craddock v. Commonwealth, 429 S.E.2d 889 (Va. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “However, because we cannot conclude that the prosecutor’s comments were harmless, we remand this case for resentencing by another judge pursuant to Code § 19.2-154. Remanded for resentencing.”
Jaeyoung Lee v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 924 S.E.2d 667 (Va. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 10× “Azcarate entered an order stating only that “[p]ursuant to Va. Code § 19.2-154, Judge Randy I. Bellows is assigned to preside over remaining aspects of this case, to include post-trial motions and sentencing.”
People v. Thompson, 222 A.D.2d 156 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 1996). “440; ND Rules Crim Pro, rule 25; Ohio Crim Rules, rule 25 (A); Tenn Rules Crim Pro, rule 25 (a); Vernon’s Annot Tex Const, art V, § 11; Utah Rules Crim Pro, rule 29 (a); Vt Rules Crim Pro, rule 25; Va Code (1950) § 19.2-154; Wash Super Ct Crim Rules, rule 6.”
Igor Peter Koob v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 0408234 (Va. Ct. App. Aug. 13, 2024). · cites it 8× “2 On appeal, Koob argues that the circuit court violated Code § 19.2-154 by not using the same judge who presided over the trial to instruct the jury and accept the verdict.”
Greg Eugene Minitee v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 1054192 (Va. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2020). · cites it 6× “Minitee further contended that the unexplored alternatives to the mistrial included continuing the jury trial to a time when the trial judge was available or when the chief judge or another judge could have presided over the trial pursuant to Code § 19.2-154. The Commonwealth,…”
Brandon Douglas Galloway v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 0938213 (Va. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2023). · cites it 4× “Galloway next argues that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for reduction of sentence because the circuit court’s “practice of substituting judges has not been promulgated as a local rule pursuant to the requirements of Rule 1:15, and the substitution of judges is…”
Corey D. Goodson, Sr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 1347232 (Va. Ct. App. Sept. 10, 2024). · cites it 4× “He asserted that a new hearing was required because the sentencing judge did not review each exhibit before the sentencing hearing, which Goodson argued was required by Code § 19.2-154. Goodson also asserted that an independent investigation revealed that Rivers was Jeffries’s…”
Edwanier Levi Jackson v. Commonwealth, No. 0041061 (Va. Ct. App. June 12, 2007). · cites it 4× “However, he did not raise his arguments regarding Rule 1:15 or Code § 19.2-154 to the trial court at the time he made his sentencing objection known.”
Creasey v. Muncy, 640 F. Supp. 21 (W.D. Va. 1985). “y trial and quaranteed petitioner acquittal and promised that petitioner would receive only two to four years; 2) counsel failed to adequately cross-examine witnesses as to their identification; and 3) counsel objected to evidence favorable to petitioner; c) petitioner was…”
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.