A. In any criminal prosecution for a felony in a circuit court or for a misdemeanor brought on direct indictment, the attorney for the Commonwealth shall have a duty to adequately and fully provide discovery as provided under Rule 3A:11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. Rule 3A:11 shall be construed to apply to such felony and misdemeanor prosecutions. This duty to disclose shall be continuing and shall apply to any additional evidence or material discovered by the Commonwealth prior to or during trial that is subject to discovery or inspection and has been previously requested by the accused. In any criminal prosecution for a misdemeanor by trial de novo in circuit court, the attorney for the Commonwealth shall have a duty to adequately and fully provide discovery as provided under Rule 7C:5 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. If an order for discovery is entered for such criminal prosecution pursuant to Rule 3A:11, the accused may request to copy or photograph any discovery materials or evidence that the accused is permitted to inspect and review, including relevant police reports, criminal records, dashboard camera footage, and body-worn camera footage as described in § 15.2-1723.1. Upon such request, the attorney for the Commonwealth shall provide to the counsel of record for the accused copies of such discovery materials, subject to the redaction, restricted dissemination, and protective orders provisions of Rule 3A:11.
B. If at any time during the course of the proceedings it is brought to the attention of the court that the attorney for the Commonwealth has failed to comply with this section, the court may order the Commonwealth to permit the discovery or inspection, grant a continuance, or prohibit the Commonwealth from introducing evidence not disclosed, or the court may enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.
1985, c. 538; 1995, c. 504; 2004, c. 348; 2026, cc. 562, 982.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
33
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case:
Muhammad v. Com., 619 S.E.2d 16 (Va. 2005).
Muhammad v. Com., 619 S.E.2d 16 (Va. 2005).
· cites it 2× “Muhammad asserts that the trial court should have dismissed the charges, precluded the death penalty, or limited the introduction of evidence pursuant to the authority of Code § 19.2-265.4. However, this code section recites potential remedies for failure to provide discovery…”
Haugen v. Shenandoah Valley Soc. Servs., 645 S.E.2d 261 (Va. 2007).
· cites it 2× “1 (continuances shall be granted to allow criminal defendant to obtain counsel and prepare for trial); Code § 19.2-265.4 (continuance is a remedy for Commonwealth's failure to provide discovery in criminal case); Code § 19.”
Knight v. Commonwealth, 443 S.E.2d 165 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 4× “Under Code § 19.2-265.4, this duty to disclose is continuing, and in the case of a violation, “the court may order the Commonwealth to permit the discovery or inspection, grant a continuance, or prohibit the Commonwealth from introducing evidence not disclosed, or the court may…”
Conway v. Commonwealth, 407 S.E.2d 310 (Va. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 4× “Thus, none of the remedies afforded by Code § 19.2-265.4, except exclusion of the evidence or a mistrial, would have afforded him a fair opportunity to respond to this evidence.”
Moreno v. Commonwealth, 392 S.E.2d 836 (Va. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 4× “See Code § 19.2-265.4. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant’s conviction.”
Wright v. Commonwealth, 667 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “"); § 19.2-265.4 ("In any criminal prosecution for a felony in a circuit court or for a misdemeanor brought on direct indictment.”
Smith v. Commonwealth, 389 S.E.2d 871 (Va. 1990).
· cites it 2× “When such information is required but the Attorney for the Commonwealth has failed to comply, Code § 19.2-265.4(B) vests the trial court with wide discretion.”
Martinez v. Commonwealth, 590 S.E.2d 57 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Appellant does not argue the Commonwealth violated Rule 3A:11 (discovery in criminal cases) or Code § 19.2-265.4 (failure to provide discovery in criminal cases).”
Naulty v. Commonwealth, 346 S.E.2d 540 (Va. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “” Code § 19.2-265.4; see also Rule 3A: 11(g).”
Stotler v. Commonwealth, 346 S.E.2d 39 (Va. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “” Code § 19.2-265.4 (emphasis added); see also Rule 3A:ll(g).”
Conway v. Commonwealth, 397 S.E.2d 263 (Va. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 4× “Thus, none of the remedies afforded by Code § 19.2-265.4, except exclusion of the evidence or a mistrial, would have afforded him a fair opportunity to respond to this evidence.”
Guba v. Commonwealth, 383 S.E.2d 764 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “” 2 See Code § 19.2-265.4; Rule 3A: 11(g).”
— Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-265.4(B) — 10 cases
Smith v. Commonwealth, 389 S.E.2d 871 (Va. 1990).
“When such information is required but the Attorney for the Commonwealth has failed to comply, Code § 19.2-265.4(B) vests the trial court with wide discretion.”
Conway v. Commonwealth, 397 S.E.2d 263 (Va. Ct. App. 1990).
“Thus, none of the remedies afforded by Code § 19.2-265.4, except exclusion of the evidence or a mistrial, would have afforded him a fair opportunity to respond to this evidence.”
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.