Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-327.2 (2026)

Issuance of writ of actual innocence based on biological evidence

✓ 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

Notwithstanding any other provision of law or rule of court, upon a petition of a person who was convicted of a felony or who was adjudicated delinquent by a circuit court of an offense that would be a felony if committed by an adult, the Supreme Court shall have the authority to issue writs of actual innocence under this chapter. The writ shall lie to the circuit court that entered the felony conviction or adjudication of delinquency and that court shall have the authority to conduct hearings, as provided for in § 19.2-327.5, on such a petition as directed by order from the Supreme Court.

2001, cc. 873, 874; 2009, cc. 139, 320; 2013, c. 170; 2020, cc. 993, 994.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: In re Watford, 809 S.E.2d 651 (Va. 2018).
In re Watford, 809 S.E.2d 651 (Va. 2018). · cites it 10× “Watford, III, ("Watford") petitions this Court to grant a writ of actual innocence based on biological evidence pursuant to Code § 19.2-327.2 et seq. I. BACKGROUND On September 14, 1977, twelve-year-old A.”
In re Brown, 810 S.E.2d 444 (Va. 2018). · cites it 2× “Implementing the authority established by Article VI, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia, Code § 19.2-327.2 vests the Court with "the authority to issue writs of actual innocence" based upon biological evidence.”
Lovitt v. Warden, Sussex I State Prison, 585 S.E.2d 801 (Va. 2003). · cites it 2× “He asserts that he is entitled to habeas corpus relief because he has been deprived of an opportunity to seek new scientific testing of the DNA found on the bloody scissors and his jacket.”
McGhie v. State, 144 A.3d 752 (Md. 2016). · cites it 2× “873 (codified at Va. Code Ann. §§ 19.2-327.2 - 6); 2004 Va.”
Gary Linwood Bush v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 813 S.E.2d 582 (Va. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Prior to examining the petitioner's claim, the Supreme Court stated it had to "address the changes that have been made to the actual innocence statutes, Code § 19.2-327.2 et seq ." 3 Id. at 121, 809 S.”
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 681 S.E.2d 74 (Va. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “See Code §§ 19.2-327.2 through 19.2-327.14. Wilson acknowledged at oral argument that she is not pursuing this remedy.”
Thomas Haynesworth v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 717 S.E.2d 817 (Va. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “” Code § 19.2-327.2. However, such a writ is exclusively within the jurisdiction of our Supreme Court.”
In re Phillips, 822 S.E.2d 1 (Va. 2018). · cites it 2× “VI, § 1 (vesting this Court with "original jurisdiction ... to consider claims of actual innocence presented by convicted felons in such cases and in such manner as may be provided by the General Assembly") (emphases added); Code §§ 19.”
In re Watford, No. 161187 (Va. Mar. 1, 2018). · cites it 10× “Watford, III, (“Watford”) petitions this Court to grant a writ of actual innocence based on biological evidence pursuant to Code § 19.2-327.2 et seq. I. BACKGROUND On September 14, 1977, twelve-year-old A.”
In re Hargrove, 924 S.E.2d 1 (Va. 2025). · cites it 6× “ACTUAL INNOCENCE STATUTE This Court has original jurisdiction to issue a writ of actual innocence based on biological evidence under Article VI, Section 1 of the Constitution of Virginia and Code § 19.2-327.2. At the outset, a petitioner must allege the following in his…”
Marvin Leon Grimm, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 902 S.E.2d 72 (Va. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “See Code § 19.2-327.2 et seq. - 12 - toxicology analysis of C.”
In re Scott, 824 S.E.2d 1 (Va. 2019). · cites it 4× “BERNARD GOODWYN Winston Lamont Scott (Scott) filed a petition for a writ of actual innocence based on biological evidence pursuant to Code § 19.2-327.2, et seq . Upon reviewing the totality of the evidence, including the records from the original case, the evidence presented at…”
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.