Where evidence exists that a homicide has been committed either within or without the Commonwealth, under circumstances that make it unknown where such crime was committed, the homicide and any related offenses shall be amenable to prosecution in the courts of the county or city where the body or any part thereof of the victim may be found or, if the victim was removed from the Commonwealth for medical treatment prior to death and died outside the Commonwealth, in the courts of the county or city from which the victim was removed for medical treatment prior to death, as if the offense has been committed in such county or city. In a prosecution pursuant to subdivision A 8 of § 18.2-31, the offense may be prosecuted in any jurisdiction in the Commonwealth in which any one of the killings may be prosecuted.
Code 1950, § 19.1-221.1; 1973, c. 308; 1975, c. 495; 1996, c. 959; 2002, c. 503; 2015, cc. 632, 637; 2021, Sp. Sess. I, cc. 344, 345.
Notes of Decisions
Quindell Montrae Kirby v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 762 S.E.2d 414 (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 45× “He argues that venue was appropriate in the City of Richmond under Code § 19.2-247, 1 because the evidence did not establish the location of the offenses and the victim’s body was found in the City of Richmond.”
Gerald, T. v. Commonwealth, 813 S.E.2d 722 (Va. 2018).
· cites it 2× “2-246 (providing for venue where offender was at time when inflicting mortal wound or other injury upon a person outside of the Commonwealth); Code § 19.2-247 (providing for venue where body found or from where victim removed from Commonwealth in certain homicide cases in which…”
Traverso v. Commonwealth, 366 S.E.2d 719 (Va. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 6× “The dispositive question on appeal asks whether the Commonwealth proved venue under Code § 19.2-247 by demonstrating that the victim’s body was found in Loudoun County, Virginia.”
Vanegas v. Commonwealth, 438 S.E.2d 289 (Va. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 4× “In such case, Code § 19.2-247 directs that the trial of one accused of the murder be conducted in Norfolk: Where evidence exists that a homicide has been committed either within or without this Commonwealth, under circumstances which make it unknown where such crime was…”
James Frank Hayes v. Commonwealth (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 7× “The prosecutor stated that until the receipt of this information from Oates, it had appeared that, pursuant to Code § 19.2-247, venue 1 was proper in Frederick County.”
Johnson v. Clarke (E.D. Va. 2022).
· cites it 2× “See Code § 19.2-247 (establishing venue for homicides where it is unknown where the crime occurred).”
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.