It shall be unlawful for any person to possess with intent to sell or offer for sale, either separately or as a part of the equipment of a motor vehicle, or to use or have as equipment on a motor vehicle operated on a highway any lighting device, warning device, signal device, safety glass, or other equipment for which approval is required by any provision of this chapter or any part or parts tending to change or alter the operation of such device, glass, or other equipment unless of a type that has been submitted to and approved by the Superintendent or meets or exceeds the standards and specifications of the Society of Automotive Engineers, the American National Standards Institute, Incorporated or the federal Department of Transportation.
Code 1950, § 46-311; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-308; 1960, c. 125; 1968, c. 172; 1970, c. 26; 1984, c. 426; 1989, c. 727.
Notes of Decisions
Richard Alvin Otey v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 735 S.E.2d 255 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 6× “” In turn, Code § 46.2-1002 mentions “lighting device[s], warning device[s], signal deviee[s], safety glass, [and] other equipment for which approval is required by any provision of this chapter.”
Reel v. Commonwealth, 522 S.E.2d 881 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 5× “” That chapter sets standards for a wide range of equipment, including tires and brakes. See, e.g., Code §§ 46.2-1041 to -1046 (tires), 46.”
United States v. Ellington, 396 F. Supp. 2d 695 (E.D. Va. 2005).
· cites it 3× “Virginia Code § 46.2-1002 requires that safety glass in a motor vehicle being operated on a highway be of an approved type.”
Teounta Ernest Lewis v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 1089162 (Va. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2017).
· cites it 7× “for which approval is required by any provision of this chapter[,] or any part or parts tending to change or alter the operation of such device, .”
United States v. McHugh, 569 F. Supp. 2d 569 (E.D. Va. 2008).
· cites it 15× “See Va.Code § 46.2-1002. If section 46.2-1002 applied to the Expedition, then Trooper Miller could reasonably have believed that the after-market equipment on the vehicle did not comply with that statute.”
Commonwealth v. Ronald Lewis Scott Snyder, No. 0234072 (Va. Ct. App. Aug. 14, 2007).
· cites it 9× “Thus, we must determine whether mirrors are “other equipment for which approval is required” by any provision in Chapter 10 of the Virginia Code.”
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Maurice D. Gaskins, No. 0101114 (Va. Ct. App. May 24, 2011).
· cites it 8× “Code § 46.2-1002 applies to “any lighting device, warning device, signal device, safety glass, or other equipment for which approval is required by any provision of this chapter.”
Commonwealth v. Najera, 68 Va. Cir. 17 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2005).
· cites it 4× “2-1003 provides that it is unlawful for a vehicle to have any device or equipment mentioned in § 46.2-1002 which is defective. The Commonwealth recognizes that “the type of equipment referenced in § 46.”
Bobbie G. Myree v. Commonwealth of Virginia, No. 0383982 (Va. Ct. App. Mar. 2, 1999).
· cites it 4× “Code § 46.2-1002 requires that safety glass in a motor vehicle being operated on a highway be of an approved type.”
Norman H. Ragland v. Commonwealth, No. 1036962 (Va. Ct. App. Feb. 18, 1997).
· cites it 4× “2-1003 prohibits the use on a vehicle of any equipment mentioned in Code § 46.2-1002 that is either unsafe or defective, whether or not this equipment exceeds the minimum requirements set forth elsewhere in the Code.”
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.