In any case in which a person charged with a crime intends (i) to put in issue his sanity at the time of the crime charged and (ii) to present testimony of an expert to support his claim on this issue at his trial, he, or his counsel, shall give notice in writing to the attorney for the Commonwealth, at least 60 days prior to his trial, of his intention to present such evidence. However, if the period between indictment and trial is less than 120 days, the person or his counsel shall give such notice no later than 60 days following indictment. In the event that such notice is not given, and the person proffers such evidence at his trial as a defense, then the court may in its discretion, either allow the Commonwealth a continuance or, under appropriate circumstances, bar the defendant from presenting such evidence. The period of any such continuance shall not be counted for speedy trial purposes under § 19.2-243.
Code 1950, § 19.1-227.1; 1970, c. 336; 1975, c. 495; 1986, c. 535; 2008, c. 372.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
22
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case:
Grattan v. Com., 685 S.E.2d 634 (Va. 2009).
Grattan v. Com., 685 S.E.2d 634 (Va. 2009).
· cites it 6× “Prior to his trial, Grattan filed a notice pursuant to Code § 19.2-168, stating his intention to put in issue his sanity at the time of the charged offenses and to present expert testimony in support of that defense.”
Andrew Gilbert Schmuhl v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 818 S.E.2d 71 (Va. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 6× “The Commonwealth may conduct its own evaluation of the defendant through a different mental health expert appointed by the court, and it may review the report created by the defendant’s mental health expert, the results of any “evaluation of the defendant’s sanity at the time of…”
Commonwealth v. Chatman, 538 S.E.2d 304 (Va. 2000).
· cites it 20× “Continuing, he posits that the use of the term "person" in Code §§ 19.2-168 and 16.1-278.11 necessarily includes both adults and juveniles.”
Schwartz v. Commonwealth, 611 S.E.2d 631 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 5× “5 before such notice is given and (2) protecting the results of the ordered evaluation from disclosure until notice is given by the defense pursuant to Code § 19.2-168 while allowing pre-notice discovery of the records upon which those results were based and from which those…”
White v. Com., 636 S.E.2d 353 (Va. 2006).
· cites it 4× “He gave timely notice to the Commonwealth of his intent to present evidence of insanity pursuant to Code § 19.2-168. The trial court appointed Dr.”
White v. Commonwealth, 616 S.E.2d 49 (Va. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 6× “Two months before the trial date, defense counsel filed notice of intent to present evidence of insanity, Code § 19.2-168. A month later, he moved to have Dr.”
White v. Commonwealth, 605 S.E.2d 337 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “A defendant who "intends (i) to put in issue his sanity at the time of the crime charged and (ii) to present testimony of an expert to support his claim on this issue at trial .”
Zelenak v. Commonwealth, 487 S.E.2d 873 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “6 may be used against the defendant at trial as evidence or as a basis for such evidence, except on the issue of his mental condition at the time of the offense after he raises the issue pursuant to § 19.2-168. Code § 19.2-169.7 explicitly refers to statements "concerning the…”
Jones v. Commonwealth, 506 S.E.2d 27 (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 4× “” Indeed, Code § 19.2-168, which contains the statutory requirement for preserving the defense of insanity, does not require an accused to plead “not guilty by reason of insanity.”
Shifflett v. Commonwealth, 274 S.E.2d 305 (Va. 1981).
“Neither provision, though preceded by § 19.2-168 requiring notice of an insanity defense, contains any language expressly limiting the committee’s inquiry to competency to stand trial, or forbidding it to go into the question of insanity at the time of the alleged offense.”
Blevins v. Commonwealth, 399 S.E.2d 173 (Va. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 5× “On December 15, 1988, Blevins gave the Commonwealth notice of his intent to present an insanity defense at trial pursuant to Code § 19.2-168. On December 23, *431 1988, the Circuit Court of Washington County ordered Blevins to undergo additional evaluation.”
Zelenak v. Commonwealth, 475 S.E.2d 853 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “6 may be used against the defendant at trial as evidence or as a basis for such evidence, except on the issue of his mental condition at the time of the offense after he raises the issue pursuant to § 19.2-168. Code § 19.2-169.7. Zelenak admits that the questions did not…”
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.