W. Va. Code » §2-2-8. Effect of repeal or expiration of law.
West Virginia Code

W. Va. Code § 2-2-8 (2026)

Effect of repeal or expiration of law

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WV-LEGwvlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
ARTICLE 2. LEGAL HOLIDAYS; SPECIAL MEMORIAL DAYS; CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTES; DEFINITIONS.

§2-2-8. Effect of repeal or expiration of law.

The repeal of a law, or its expiration by virtue of any provision contained therein, shall not affect any offense committed, or penalty or punishment incurred, before the repeal took effect, or the law expired, save only that the proceedings thereafter had shall conform as far as practicable to the laws in force at the time such proceedings take place, unless otherwise specially provided; and that if any penalty or punishment be mitigated by the new law, such new law may, with the consent of the party affected thereby, be applied to any judgment pronounced after it has taken effect.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1971–2023 · leading case: State v. Easton, 510 S.E.2d 465 (W. Va. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Easton, 510 S.E.2d 465 (W. Va. 1998). · cites it 36× “As the re-enactment of the remainder of former § 9-6-15 does not contain a savings clause, the defendants contend that the general savings clause contained in W. Va.Code § 2-2-8 (1923) (Repl.Vol.1994) governs the propriety of their sentences: The repeal of a law, or its…”
State Ex Rel. Arbogast v. Mohn, 260 S.E.2d 820 (W. Va. 1979). · cites it 10× “save only that the proceedings thereafter had shall conform as far as practicable to the laws in force at the time such proceedings take place, unless otherwise specially provided; and that if any penalty or punishment be mitigated by the new law, such new law may, with the…”
State of West Virginia v. Jerry Deel, 788 S.E.2d 741 (W. Va. 2016). · cites it 2× “If the amended penal statute provides lesser penalties for the same conduct proscribed by the statute in effect at the time of the offense, the defendant.”
United States v. United States Coin & Currency, 401 U.S. 715 (1971). · cites it 2× “040 (1956); West Virginia: W. Va. Code Ann. § 2-2-8 (1966); Wisconsin: Wisc.”
State v. Cline, 525 S.E.2d 326 (W. Va. 1999). · cites it 18× “W.Va.Code § 2-2-8. We recently reaffirmed this principle in State v.”
Holiday v. United States, 683 A.2d 61 (D.C. 1996). “(quoting W.Va.Code § 2-2-8). See also People v. Thomas, 185 Colo.”
Gibson v. Bechtold, 245 S.E.2d 258 (W. Va. 1978). · cites it 2× “3 W. Va. Code § 2-2-8 , saving the right of the state to proceed against persons who allegedly committed offenses under a law subsequently repealed, Carlton v.”
Ctr. for Individual Freedom v. Natalie H. Tennant, 706 F.3d 270 (4th Cir. 2013). “W. Va.Code § 2-2-8. Therefore, if we vacate the injunctions as moot, West Virgima will have the power to punish organizations for earlier violations of the statute.”
State Ex Rel. Miller v. Bordenkircher, 272 S.E.2d 676 (W. Va. 1980). · cites it 2× “[Footnote omitted] W.Va. Code, § 2-2-8 is to be read as a proviso to any repealing act which does not contain an express savings clause, and operates to preserve prosecution of offenses committed under a repealed statute which have not reached final judgment.”
SER Justin S. Golden, Sr. v. Hon. Tod J. Kaufman, Judge, 760 S.E.2d 883 (W. Va. 2014). · cites it 2× “See W.Va.Code § 2-2-8 (2013) (“The repeal of a law .”
State of West Virginia v. William B. Shingleton, 790 S.E.2d 505 (W. Va. 2016). · cites it 9× “Justice Davis expressed grave concern that “the unwarranted and unprecedented interpretation given by the majority to W. Va.Code 2-2-8 sets the stage for voiding countless criminal sentences.”
Poling v. Wise Servs. Inc. (N.D.W. Va. 2019). · cites it 7× “3 (1978) (“W. Va. Code § 2-2-8, saving the right of the state to proceed against persons who allegedly committed offenses under a law subsequently repealed.”
Show all 20 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.