Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-257 (2026)

Trial without jury in felony cases

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Upon a plea of guilty in a felony case, tendered in person by the accused after being advised by counsel, the court shall hear and determine the case without the intervention of a jury; or if the accused plead not guilty, with his consent after being advised by counsel and the concurrence of the attorney for the Commonwealth and of the court entered of record, the court shall hear and determine the case without the intervention of a jury. In such cases the court shall have and exercise all the powers, privileges and duties given to juries by any statute relating to crimes and punishments.

Code 1950, § 19.1-192; 1960, c. 366; 1975, c. 495.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 48 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Williams, 553 S.E.2d 760 (Va. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Williams, 553 S.E.2d 760 (Va. 2001). · cites it 6× “I, § 8; Code § 19.2-257. This provision requires the circuit court to determine whether a defendant voluntarily and intelligently waives his right to a jury trial before proceeding to trial of the case.”

Carter v. Commonwealth, 345 S.E.2d 5 (Va. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “Here, the record reveals that counsel for the defense and the Commonwealth had been discussing the possibility of jury trial but it does not disclose what, if any, communications were made concerning a waiver of appellant’s right to trial by jury. If defense counsel declines—or…”

Smallwood v. Commonwealth, 418 S.E.2d 567 (Va. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “Smallwood argues that the trial judge failed to give his affirmative consent to try these felony cases without a jury and failed to elicit a similar consent from the Commonwealth.”

Jackson v. Commonwealth, 590 S.E.2d 520 (Va. 2004). · cites it 2× “Code § 19.2-257. Thus, to the extent Jackson suggests otherwise, he is incorrect.”

Commonwealth of Virginia v. Rayshawn Torrell Greer, 760 S.E.2d 132 (Va. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “1, which provides: “If the jury cannot agree on a punishment, the court shall impanel a different jury to ascertain punishment, unless the defendant, the attorney for the Commonwealth, and the court agree, in the manner provided in § 19.2-257, that the court shall fix punishment.”

Graham v. Commonwealth, 397 S.E.2d 270 (Va. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “” Code § 19.2-257 also provides: Upon a plea of guilty in a felony case, tendered in person by the accused after being advised by counsel, the court shall hear and determine the case without the intervention of the jury .”

Glenn v. Commonwealth, 633 S.E.2d 205 (Va. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “I, § 8 (emphasis added); see also Code § 19.2-257 (providing that, following a guilty plea, "the court shall hear and determine the case").”

Pope v. Commonwealth, 360 S.E.2d 352 (Va. 1987). · cites it 2× “Code § 19.2-257 provides that an accused person who pleads not guilty may, with the advice of counsel, waive jury trial and may be tried by the court without a jury, but only with “the concurrence of the attorney for the Commonwealth and of the court entered of record.”

Young v. Com., 643 S.E.2d 491 (Va. 2007). · cites it 2× “1 states: If the sentence imposed pursuant to this section is subsequently set aside or found invalid solely due to an error in the sentencing proceeding, the court shall impanel a different jury to ascertain punishment, unless the defendant, the attorney for the Commonwealth…”

Thomas v. Commonwealth, 238 S.E.2d 834 (Va. 1977). · cites it 3× “See also Code §§ 19.2-257 and 19.2-258. The Virginia Constitution and statutes are silent as to whether an accused will be permitted to withdraw a waiver of a trial by jury once that waiver has been exercised; and if so, when such withdrawal of the waiver must be exercised.”

In Re Horan, 634 S.E.2d 675 (Va. 2006). · cites it 2× “5, to exercise judicial discretion to decide whether to impose the death penalty. Judge Alden *679 would likewise have the authority, and thus the discretion, to decide in the first instance whether to impose the death penalty or life imprisonment if the case were tried without…”

Kibert v. Commonwealth, 222 S.E.2d 790 (Va. 1976). · cites it 2× “Code § 19-166, in effect at the time of Kibert’s trial (now § 19.2-257), provided that “[u]pon a plea of guilty in a felony case .”

Show all 48 citing cases →

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.