A. The provisions of this article, except §§ 53.1-160 and 53.1-160.1, shall not apply to any sentence imposed or to any prisoner incarcerated upon a conviction for a felony offense committed on or after January 1, 1995. Any person sentenced to a term of incarceration for a felony offense committed on or after January 1, 1995, shall not be eligible for parole upon that offense.
B. The provisions of this article shall apply to any person who was sentenced by a jury prior to June 9, 2000, for any felony offense committed on or after January 1, 1995, and who remained incarcerated for such offense on July 1, 2020, other than (i) a Class 1 felony or (ii) any of the following felony offenses where the victim was a minor: (a) rape in violation of § 18.2-61; (b) forcible sodomy in violation of § 18.2-67.1; (c) object sexual penetration in violation of § 18.2-67.2; (d) aggravated sexual battery in violation of § 18.2-67.3; (e) an attempt to commit a violation of clause (a), (b), (c), or (d); or (f) carnal knowledge in violation of § 18.2-63, 18.2-64.1, or 18.2-64.2.
C. The provisions of this article shall also apply to any person who (i) was sentenced by a jury between June 9, 2000 and January 1, 2005, for any felony offense committed on or after January 1, 1995; (ii) can prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the jury in his case was not instructed on the fact that parole has been abolished; and (iii) remained incarcerated for such offense on July 1, 2026, other than (a) a Class 1 felony or (b) any of the following felony offenses where the victim was a minor: (1) rape in violation of § 18.2-61; (2) forcible sodomy in violation of § 18.2-67.1; (3) object sexual penetration in violation of § 18.2-67.2; (4) aggravated sexual battery in violation of § 18.2-67.3; (5) an attempt to commit a violation of clause (1), (2), (3), or (4); or (6) carnal knowledge in violation of § 18.2-63, 18.2-64.1, or 18.2-64.2.
D. The Parole Board shall establish procedures for consideration of parole of persons entitled under subsection B or C consistent with the provisions of § 53.1-154.
E. Any person who meets eligibility criteria for parole under subsection B and pursuant to § 53.1-151 as of July 1, 2020, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2021, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause. Any person who meets eligibility criteria for parole under subsection C and pursuant to § 53.1-151 as of July 1, 2026, shall be scheduled for a parole interview no later than July 1, 2027, allowing for extension of time for reasonable cause.
F. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A or any other provision of this article to the contrary, any person sentenced to a term of life imprisonment for a single felony or multiple felonies committed while the person was a juvenile and who has served at least 20 years of such sentence shall be eligible for parole and any person who has active sentences that total more than 20 years for a single felony or multiple felonies committed while the person was a juvenile and who has served at least 20 years of such sentences shall be eligible for parole. The Board shall review and decide the case of each prisoner who is eligible for parole in accordance with §§ 53.1-154 and 53.1-154.2 and rules adopted pursuant to subdivision 2 of § 53.1-136.
1994, 2nd Sp. Sess., cc. 1, 2; 2020, cc. 2, 529, 1200, 1272; 2026, cc. 367, 984, 1046.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
47
cases (
19 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case:
Fishback v. Commonwealth, 532 S.E.2d 629 (Va. 2000).
Fishback v. Commonwealth, 532 S.E.2d 629 (Va. 2000).
· cites it 36× “In this appeal, we primarily consider whether a defendant in a non-capital felony trial is entitled to have the jury instructed that, pursuant to Code § 53.1-165.1, parole has been abolished in Virginia.”
Yarbrough v. Commonwealth, 519 S.E.2d 602 (Va. 1999).
· cites it 16× “Since the abolition of parole in Virginia through the enactment of Code § 53.1-165.1, a jury has imposed the death sentence only where the Commonwealth asserted the defendant's future dangerousness to society.”
Johnson, Raheem v. Commonwealth, 793 S.E.2d 326 (Va. 2016).
· cites it 8× “Code § 53.1-165.1. Non-capital juvenile homicide offenders in Virginia remain eligible to apply for geriatric release at the age of 60.”
Walker v. Commonwealth, 486 S.E.2d 126 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 12× “I write to address further the issue whether the abolition of parole in Virginia for all felony offenses, under Code § 53.1-165.1, is "relevant... evidence related to punishment" in a bifurcated sentencing proceeding under Code § 19.”
Malvo v. Mathena, 254 F. Supp. 3d 820 (E.D. Va. 2017).
· cites it 6× “See Va. Code § 53.1-165.1. On October 26, 2004, in Spotsylvania County Circuit Court, Petitioner pled guilty through an “Alford plea” to one count of capital murder, one count of attempted capital murder, and two counts of using a firearm in the commission of a felony.”
Virginia v. LeBlanc, 137 S. Ct. 1726 (2017).
“See Va. Code Ann. § 53.1-165.1 (2013). As a form of replacement, Virginia enacted its so-called "geriatric release" program, which allows older inmates to receive conditional release under some circumstances.”
Dennis LeBlanc v. Randall Mathena, 841 F.3d 256 (4th Cir. 2016).
· cites it 3× “While Virginia had, in 1994, abolished traditional parole for felony offenders, see Va. Code Ann. § 53.1-165.1 , it had at the same time adopted a “geriatric release” program that allows for the conditional release of inmates who serve at least 10 years of their sentence and…”
Bell v. Commonwealth, 563 S.E.2d 695 (Va. 2002).
· cites it 2× “01, the jury will be instructed that the defendant is not eligible for parole in accordance with Code § 53.1-165.1. In those cases where geriatric release is a possibility, then the jury will be instructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of Code § 53.”
Atkins v. Commonwealth, 534 S.E.2d 312 (Va. 2000).
· cites it 4× “Unlike the circumstances existing when Mackall was decided, however, the legislature, with the enactment of Code § 53.1-165.1, has effectively provided that a death sentence commuted to a life sentence shall be a life sentence without the possibility of parole.”
Hartigan v. Commonwealth, 522 S.E.2d 406 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “” Code § 53.1-165.1. Additionally, in 1994, the General' Assembly abolished the former unitary trial scheme in non-capital felony *255 prosecutions and established a system of bifurcated jury trials.”
Mosby v. Commonwealth, 482 S.E.2d 72 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 4× “We further hold that no instruction need be given even if the Commonwealth argues, as it may have done in this case, for a lengthy sentence because the appellant poses a future danger to society.”
Hills v. Commonwealth, 553 S.E.2d 722 (Va. 2001).
· cites it 4× “" The trial court refused to grant the requested instruction; instead, the court told the jury that "[y]ou should not concern yourself with this. You should sentence in accordance with the instruction given to you.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 53.1-165.1(A) — 2 cases
— Va. Code Ann. § 53.1-165.1(B) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 53.1-165.1(E) — 6 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.