Virginia
Restoration of Rights & Record Relief

Last updated: December 9, 2024

I.  Loss & restoration of civil/firearms rights

A.  Civil rights

A person convicted of a felony loses the right to vote, hold public office, and sit on a jury. Va. Const. art. II, § 1 (“No person who has been convicted of a felony shall be qualified to vote unless his civil rights have been restored by the Governor or other appropriate authority.”); see also Va. Code § 8.01-338(2) (“Persons convicted of treason or a felony” are disqualified from jury service); Va. Code § 24.2-231 (disqualifying persons convicted of felonies from holding office).

These civil rights, plus the right to serve as a notary, may only be regained by action of the governor under his constitutional pardon power, through restoration of rights or a “simple” pardon. Va. Const. art. V, § 12. According to the website of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, who administers the governor’s restoration of rights program, “individuals are eligible to apply to have their rights restored after being released from incarceration.” The website also states that “an individual is eligible to apply to have his/her rights restored by the Governor if he/she has been convicted of a felony and is no longer incarcerated.”

Because Virginia’s restoration scheme is not dictated by statute but rather by the policy predilections of the current governor, it has undergone some significant changes in the past ten years.  The current Republican governor Glenn Youngkin (2022-present) has apparently retained the eligibility policy of his immediate Democratic predecessor Ralph Northam(2018-2022), so that anyone not actually incarcerated is eligible to regain the vote.  However, while the Governor’s annual reports to the General Assembly in January 2023 and March 2024 show that hundreds of individuals have been restored to the franchise during his tenure, restoration is no longer automatic as it was under his predecessors, and his case-by-case restoration system has faced legal challenges as opaque and arbitrary. Indeed, a federal judge recently commented, in denying one such challenge, that “No one would suggest that Governor Youngkin’s ‘fully implemented’ system is transparent, or that it gives the appearance of fairness.”1 Proposed constitutional amendments for automatic rights restoration have failed on several occasions in the recent past, but the General Assembly reportedly has plans to try again in 2025.    

Virginia also has a statutory procedure for petitioning a court for findings leading to fast-track consideration by the governor within 90 days, which is available only to those with non-violent convictions and with stricter eligibility criteria. See Va. Code § 53.1-231.2 (petitioner cannot have been convicted of any violent, drug, or election-related crime; must have been free of any additional convictions for a five-year period after completion of sentence, and must have “demonstrated civic responsibility through community or comparable service.”)  This process seems anachronistic in light of the relaxation of gubernatorial restoration standards and procedures in recent years.  

In 2024, HB1330 was enacted to add a new Va. Code § 24.2-700.1 to provide that any registered voter confined while awaiting trial or for having been convicted of a misdemeanor may vote by absentee ballot.  The law requires the institution or facility in which such voter is confined to (i) provide the means and opportunity for such voter to complete and submit a timely application for an absentee ballot and to properly mark his absentee ballot and (ii) ensure such voter’s marked absentee ballot is returned in accordance with law. 

Out-of-state and federal convictions: According to the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, people who were convicted in another state, and whose voting rights were restored in the jurisdiction where they were convicted (evidenced by voter registration card), may vote in Virginia. This applies also to persons convicted of federal offenses in another state. Persons convicted in other jurisdictions while residing in Virginia (including federal offenders), or who moved to Virginia before their rights were restored in the jurisdiction of conviction, may apply to the Governor for restoration under his constitutional pardon power. See Part II, infra.

Constitutional amendment:  In February 2021, a proposal to amend the state constitution was approved by the legislature that, if approved a second time by the next legislature and by a referendum, would have disenfranchised only people sentenced to a prison term, and would have restored their right to vote upon release from prison. After elections in the fall of 2021, the measure was reintroduced in 2022 but was rejected by a House subcommittee. The measure failed again in 2023, ending the amendment process.  The General Assembly reportedly has plans to try again in 2025:  See the House version continued from the 2024 session, and the Senate version reintroduced for the 2025 session.

B.  Firearms

Persons convicted of a felony lose firearms rights, as do those adjudicated delinquent at age 14 or older of murder, kidnapping, robbery with a firearm, or rape. Additionally, an adjudication of delinquency for any crime that would be a felony if committed by an adult results in the loss of firearm rights until the person reaches the age of 29.  Va. Code § 18.2-308.2(A).  Firearms rights may be restored by pardon or by gubernatorial restoration of rights, § 18.2-308.2(B), or by court order in the county of the applicant’s residence if their “civil rights have been restored by the Governor or other appropriate authority.” See § 18.2-308.2(C). In what appears to be a somewhat questionable decision, in light of the clear grant of authority to the governor under §18.2-308.2(B) to restore firearms rights through a pardon, the Virginia Supreme Court in Gallagher v. Commonwealth, 284 Va. 444, 732 S.E.2d 22 (2012) held that the legislature’s grant of authority to the court under § 18.2-308.2(C) superseded and rendered nugatory its grant of authority to the governor to restore firearms rights in light of the longstanding constitutional concern for separation of powers:

. . .[O]ur constitutional history demonstrates a cautious and incremental approach to any expansions of the executive power, leading to the conclusion that the concerns motivating the original framers in 1776 still survive in Virginia. If the executive clemency power were construed to include the restoration of firearm rights, then Code § 18.2-308.2(C), insofar as it grants the circuit courts’ jurisdiction to restore them, would not only be redundant, but would be an unconstitutional intrusion by one branch of government on the powers of another.

284 Va. at 451.  In any event, the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office advises that as a matter of policy, firearms rights are restored in Virginia only by court order and not by the governor.

If the person is not a resident of the Commonwealth, restoration may be sought in “the circuit court of any county or city where such person was last convicted of a felony or adjudicated delinquent . . .”  Id.  A person who resides in the state but with an out of state conviction must also pursue this judicial route to relief in order to hunt in Virginia.  See Farnsworth v. Commonwealth, 599 S.E.2d 482 (2004), aff’d, 270 Va. 1, 613 S.E.2d 459 (2005).2  Note that a Virginia resident with an out-of-state conviction must satisfy the requirements of 18 U.S. C. § 921(a)(20) relating to record relief in the jurisdiction of conviction in order to avoid the bar in federal firearms law.   

Concealed carry permits

In 2014, Virginia enacted new restrictions on concealed carry permits for those convicted of two or more misdemeanors (5 years), marijuana possession and public drunkenness (3 years), stalking (permanent with no relief), and juvenile offenses that would be a felony (16 years). See Va. Code § 18.2-308.09.

II.  Pardon policy & practice

A.  Authority – Pardon and restoration of rights

Pardon: The governor may grant a full pardon or limited restoration of rights, “under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by law.” Va. Const. art. V, § 12; see also Va. Code § 53.1-229.  Section 12 also requires the governor to “communicate to the General Assembly, at each regular session, particulars of every case of fine or penalty remitted, of reprieve or pardon granted, and of punishment commuted, with his reasons for remitting, granting, or commuting the same.” In Virginia, the governor may grant “simple” pardons for forgiveness of crimes,  an “absolute” pardon for innocence, or a ”conditional pardon” to commute a prison sentence.  “Partial” pardons are granted to avoid deportation.  See “Effect” section below. 

Annual reports to the legislature:  The governor’s annual reports to the General Assembly (“List of Pardons, Commutations, Reprieves, and Other Forms of Executive Clemency”), including reasons for granting clemency in each case, are accessible dating back to 1968 — though they must be searched on a year-by-year basis with separate URLs for each year. See, e.g., https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2024/SD2/PDF; https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2023/SD2/PDF; https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2022/SD2/PDF, etc. 

Restoration of rights:  The governor is also solely responsible for granting restoration of civil rights, a process that is administered through the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.  Restoration of rights grants are also listed in the governor’s annual reports to the General Assembly required by the constitution.  The evolution of the governor’s restoration policy from 2013 to the present is described in Part I(A).   

B.  Administration

The legislature has authorized the Parole Board, at the request of the governor, to investigate and make recommendations on pardon cases, but this does not limit the governor’s power. Va. Code §§ 53.1-136(5), 53.1-231.  The Parole Board consists of five members appointed by the governor to open-ended terms.  No more than two members are full-time. § 53.1-135.  One must be a representative of a victims group.  § 53.1-134.  Applications for both pardon and restoration of rights are made to the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.  The Secretary of the Commonwealth alone makes the recommendation in restoration of rights cases.  An explanation of the clemency and Restoration of Rights processes can be found on the Secretary’s website. 

C.  Eligibility

Restoration of rights:  Civil rights lost as result of a felony conviction may only be regained by action of the governor under the constitutional pardon power. The Virginia governors’ policies on restoration of civil rights, and their evolution in the last decade, are described in Part I, above.  A person may apply for Restoration of Rights upon release from incarceration.  

Pardon: Eligibility standards are posted on the website of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.  An applicant must 

  • Be free of all conditions set by the court (including any probation period, suspended time, or good time behavior) on all convictions followed by a waiting period of five years.3 
  • Have been granted Restoration of Rights before petitioning for the pardon. This is only required for felony convictions.

If a pardon application is denied, an applicant may reapply after two years. Federal and out-of-state offenders are not eligible to apply for pardon, but they may apply for Restoration of Rights. 

D.  Effect

Restoration of rights: Restores right to vote, sit on jury, hold public office, and serve as a notary public. It does not restore firearms rights.   

Pardon: The various types of pardon are described in a “fact sheet” on the website of the Secretary of the Commonwealth. A “simple” pardon does not expunge the record, but “it does constitute official forgiveness and often serves as a means for the petitioner to advance in employment, education, and self-esteem.”  The criminal records of those who receive a simple pardon are marked with a notation indicating the pardon grant, but the record remains available to the public. A “simple” pardon is useful in signifying rehabilitation, but Virginia authorities advise that it is not clear what if any legal effect such a pardon may have under state law.   

The governor may also grant a “partial pardon” to avoid immigration consequences, in some cases by reducing a sentence retrospectively. Because federal immigration authorities have taken the position that Virginia “simple” pardons do not satisfy the requirement in federal law that a pardon be “full and unconditional,” see, e.g., Karen Brulliard, Kaine Intervenes in Deportation Case, Washington Post, August 15, 2008, in several recent cases where deportation was triggered by the length of the sentence imposed, the governor took the unusual step of commuting the person’s sentence nunc pro tunc.4  The Secretary of the Commonwealth’s website states that “A partial pardon is a form of a conditional pardon and can be granted to individuals who are experiencing immigration issues. In order to be considered for immigration related clemency, the individual must be facing deportation in 30 days or less. Due to this shortened time frame, immigration clemency requests are handled in an expedited process.”

An “absolute” pardon is generally granted only for innocence. According to the Secretary of Commonwealth’s website, a petitioner must have pleaded not guilty and, if eligible, exhausted all other remedies, including filing a writ of actual innocence.  Effective July 1, 2019, an “absolute” pardon entitles a person to automatic judicial expungement and no petition need be filed with the court.  Va. Code § 19.2-392.2(I).

A third type of pardon, a “conditional” pardon, is granted to those currently incarcerated, and has the effect of commuting the sentence. These include so-called “medical pardons,” a few of which have been granted for people in the state prison system who have terminal illnesses. See Va. Code § 53.1-40.02.

Firearms

Va. Code Ann. §18.2-308.2(B) provides that firearms dispossession provisions “shall not apply to . . . .(iii) any person who has been pardoned or whose political disabilities have been removed pursuant to Article V, Section 12 of the Constitution of Virginia provided the Governor, in the document granting the pardon or removing the person’s political disabilities, may expressly place conditions upon the reinstatement of the person’s right to ship, transport, possess or receive firearms.”  However, the Supreme Court of Virginia has held that only the courts and not the governor have authority to relieve firearms dispossession. See Gallagher v. Commonwealth, 284 Va. 444, 451, 732 S.E.2d 22 (Va. 2012).  See discussion in Part I(B), above.  

E.  Process

Restoration of rights  – See Part I(A) 

Pardon – Governor McAuliffe formalized the pardon process, and an application form was posted on the website of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.  Completed forms were sent to the Secretary of the Commonwealth and during the tenure of Governors McAuliffe and Northam were frequently forwarded to the Parole Board for a non-binding recommendation following an investigation. Va. Code § 53.1-136(6).  Interested persons are invited to contact the Secretary’s office by email (pardons@governor.virginia.gov) or by phone (804-692-2542.)  The governor is required by the state constitution to give a reason for each grant in his report to the legislature (see above), but he generally does not report on denials and gives no reasons for them.  Access to the governor’s annual reports is described in Part II(A) above. 

F.  Frequency of grants

Restoration of rights

As a result of the expedited restoration procedure described in Part I(A) above that was begun during the tenure of Governor McDonnell (2010-2014), thousands of individuals have had their voting rights restored by executive order.  Restoration to those eligible was essentially automatic during the tenures of Governor Terry McAuliffe (2014–2018) and Governor Ralph Northam (2018–2022). Governor Youngkin reverted to a case-by-case process for restoring voting rights with the same generous eligibility, and he granted hundreds each year of his term in 2022 and 2023.  They are listed by name in the annual reports to the legislature.  See https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2023/SD2/PDF,  https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2024/SD2/PDF.   

Pardon

Like his predecessors, Governor Youngkin has granted dozens of simple pardons in each year of his tenure, as well as a number of conditional pardons (commutations). The pardon grants and some of the case details are described in his end-of-year reports to the legislature. See https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2023/SD2/PDF;  https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2024/SD2/PDF. 

Governor Ralph Northam issued more than 1200 simple pardons during his four years in office (2018-2022), and 126,000 restorations of rights. These are all listed in his end-of-year reports to the legislature. See, e.g., Report dated February 9, 2021.  He also issued a number of conditional pardons (commutations).  Governor McAuliffe granted 189 simple pardons over four years, a majority to individuals convicted of misdemeanors, most grants citing the recipient’s “commendable adjustment” since conviction and “upon the recommendation of the Parole Board.”  Governor McAuliffe also issued 10 “partial pardons” to reduce a non-citizen’s sentence to avoid immigration consequences, either deportability (less than 365 days) or inadmissibility. See Section D above on “partial pardons.”

In his four years in office (2010-2014) Governor McDonnell granted a total of 52 simple pardons, 46 in his final year in office, for reasons ranging from restoration of firearms rights to facilitate military enlistment and removal of legal barriers to adoption, to relief from disqualification for public office and employment.   He also granted four “conditional pardons” to enable the recipients to avoid deportation, and a number of medical pardons (commutations).  Governor Kaine (2006-2010) issued 108 simple pardons (three to individuals seeking to avoid deportation), and one commutation to avoid deportation. Id. He also granted a number of absolute pardons (for innocence), conditional pardons (sentence commutations), and medical pardons (terminally ill prisoners).  His predecessor Governor Mark Warner granted a total of 46 simple pardons from 2002-2006.

G.  Contact

Clemency Staff
804-692-2542
pardons@governor.virginia.gov

III.  Expungement, sealing & other record relief

A.  2021 record clearing laws – in general

Until 2021, Virginia law made no provision for expunging or sealing adult conviction records, except those that have been vacated pursuant to a writ of actual innocence, see Va. Code § 19.2-392.2(J), or those which were the subject of an absolute pardon (for innocence), see § 19.2-392.2 (I). 

With enactment of HB 2113 and SB1339, Virginia gained one of the more progressive record relief systems in the country, with a mixture of automatic and petition-based sealing, both for convictions generally and marijuana offenses specifically.  Note that these laws have not yet gone into effect, and at the time of their enactment were scheduled for mid-2025.  

The general record relief legislation includes five key provisions:

    1. Establishes a system of automatic sealing for misdemeanor non-convictions, nine types of misdemeanor convictions, and deferred dismissals for underage alcohol and marijuana possession.
    2. Allows for sealing of felony acquittals and dismissals at disposition with the consent of the prosecuting attorney.
    3. Provides for sealing nearly all midemeanors (ex. DUI and domestic assault) after 7 years, Level 5 and 6 felony convictions after 10 conviction-free years, and deferred dismissals through a petition-based court process. Notably, court debt will not be a barrier to record clearance under the legislation.
    4. Introduces a system of court-appointed counsel for individuals who cannot afford an attorney for the petition-based sealing process.
    5. Requires private companies that buy and sell criminal records to routinely delete sealed records and creates a private right of action for individuals against companies that refuse to do so.

The provisions of HB 2113 are scheduled to go into effect no later than 2025, and they are described together in a final “2021 law” section H below.

A separate bill providing for marijuana legalization and expungement (SB 1406) authorized the automatic expungement of records related to certain misdemeanor marijuana offenses along with petition-based expungement of all other misdemeanor and many felony marijuana offenses. With one exception, these provisions are also scheduled to go into effect by 2025. See the section below on marijuana offenses.

B.  Deferred dispositions

General deferred dispositions: In 2020, Virginia enacted its first broad deferred disposition law, authorizing expungement with the consent of the prosecution. Va. Code § 19.2-298.02 enacted by SB5033.  Effective March 1, 2021, in any case courts may, with the agreement of the Commonwealth, after plea or trial, with or without a guilty finding or determination, and notwithstanding entry of a conviction order—upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, including mitigating factors and the request of the victim—defer entry of a conviction order or a final order, and continue the case on reasonable terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties or imposed by the court. The final disposition may be a conviction of the original charge, conviction of an alternative charge, or dismissal.  In the event of dismissal, expungement may follow if the prosecutor agrees:

Upon agreement of all parties, a charge that is dismissed pursuant to this section may be considered as otherwise dismissed for purposes of expungement of police and court records in accordance with § 19.2–392.2, and such agreement of all parties and expungement eligibility shall be indicated in the final disposition order.

§ 19.2-298.02(D). This statute effectively overrules caselaw limiting the effect of deferred dispositions under older authorities that include a guilty plea. See Comm. v. Dotson, 661 S.E.2d 473, 476 (Va. 2008) (where court required to find evidence of guilt under § 18.2-251, charges not “otherwise dismissed” within the meaning of expungement statute).  See also Crespo v. Holder, 631 F.3d 130 (4th Cir. 2011) (where non-citizen pled not guilty under § 18.2-251, deferred adjudication was not a conviction for purposes of 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(48)(A)(i) to make him deportable since there was no concession or finding of guilt).

Deferred disposition for a misdemeanor property offense: The court may grant deferred disposition for a misdemeanor property offense (with certain exceptions), upon plea of guilty or not guilty, if the facts found by the court would justify a finding of guilt, without entering a judgment of guilt—unless the accused has been previously convicted of a felony, or previously had an offense dismissed under this section. Va. Code § 19.2-303.2.  Because the court must find facts justifying a finding of guilt, the ruling of Comm. v. Dotson, supra, would appear to preclude expungement.

Deferred disposition for a first drug offense: The court may grant deferred disposition for certain first drug offenses, upon plea of guilty or not guilty, if the facts found by the court would justify a finding of guilt, without entering a judgment of guilt. Va. Code § 18.2-251.  Per a 2024 enactment, a prior conviction for misdemeanor marijuana possession does not make a person ineligible for this program. See HB452.  Charges may be dismissed but no authority exists to expunge or seal the record because the court is required to find evidence of guilt. See Comm. v. Dotson, supra.  The statute specifies that if a court places an individual on probation under this section, it is considered a conviction for purposes of school suspension under § 22.1-315.  Cf.  Crespo v. Holder, supra, where non-citizen pled not guilty under § 18.2-251, deferred adjudication was not a conviction for purposes of 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(48)(A)(i) to make him deportable.

Deferred disposition for persons with autism and intellectual disabilities: A new law enacted in 2020 and effective March 1, 2021, allows the court to grant a deferred disposition upon a plea of guilty or not guilty, if “the defendant has been diagnosed by a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist with (i) an autism spectrum disorder as defined in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association or (ii) an intellectual disability as defined in § 37.2-100 and the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the criminal conduct was caused by or had a direct and substantial relationship to the person’s disorder or disability.” Va. Code § 19.2-303.6. The court must find facts that would justify a guilty finding and give “due consideration” to the position of the Commonwealth and views of the victim. Acts of violence and crimes where deferred disposition is provided by statute are ineligible.  This authority is available even if the accused had a previous conviction, deferred disposition, or juvenile adjudication, unless a deferred disposition would be “inconsistent with the interests of justice.” Id.  However, no expungement because of the requirement that the court find facts justifying guilty finding. See Comm. v. Dotson, supra. 

Specialized courts: Virginia has specialized court dockets for drug abuse, behavioral health (mental health), and veterans’ treatment. See Va. Code §§ 18.2-254.1, -254.2, -254.3.

C.  Marijuana offenses

Limited access to marijuana misdemeanor records: In May 2020, possession of marijuana was converted to a civil offense, § 18.2-250.1.  Public access to records of past arrests, charges, and convictions for marijuana possession in the central repository was automatically limited, § 19.2-389.3, employers and educational institutions were prohibited from inquiring about these records, and state and local officials may not require an applicant for a license, permit, registration, or governmental service to disclose information about them. See HB 972.

In April 2021, SB1406 eliminated criminal penalties for simple possession of up to one ounce of marijuana by persons 21 years of age or older. This bill also expanded the offenses subject to the limits on dissemination of criminal history record information (discussed above) to include arrests, charges, and convictions for misdemeanor with intent to distribute marijuana offenses. These records will be automatically sealed in the Virginia State Police systems on July 1, 2021. See website of Virginia’s Cannabis Control Authority. 

Automatic and petition-based expungement of marijuana records: SB1406 further provides that by July 1, 2025, all records of arrests, charges, and convictions for simple marijuana possession, including court records, will be automatically expunged, and that misdemeanor sale of marijuana paraphernalia will be eligible for a petition-based expungement process. § 19.2–392.2:2. (See https://www.cannabis.virginia.gov/.) Additional provisions of SB1406 proposing to repeal a statute providing penalties for distribution and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, and authorizing automatic expungement of misdemeanor possession with intent to distribute marijuana and petition-based expungement of felony marijuana offenses, will not take effect because they were not reenacted in 2022, as required by the legalization law. See 2021 Virginia Laws Ch. 550, cl. 9 (S.B. 1406).

See also the provisions of SB 2113 relating to marijuana described below in the “Clean slate” section H below.

 D. Vacatur for victims of human trafficking

In 2021 Virginia enacted a series of provisions authorizing vacatur and expungement for victims of sex trafficking convicted or adjudicated guilty of prostitution and related offenses. See §19.2-327.15 et seq.  The court shall hold a hearing to determine whether the person was a victim – unless the commonweath’s attorney certifies that a person was a victim in which case the court need not hold a hearing. In 2022 §19.2-327.19 was amended to provide that a petitioner seeking a writ of vacatur based on status as a victim of sex trafficking shall not be required to pay any fees or costs for filing such petition if the petitioner is found to be unable to pay them.  See HB711.

E.  Non-conviction records

See discussion below in section H of the restrictions on access imposed by the 2021 “Clean Slate” law.

Expungement of police and court records by petition is authorized under Va. Code § 19.2-392.2, in the case of acquittal or where charges were nol prossed or “otherwise dismissed,” but not where adjudication deferred after a finding of guilt.  See Comm. v. Dotson, supra, 661 S.E.2d  at 476 (where court required to find evidence of guilt under § 18.2-251, charges not “otherwise dismissed” within the meaning of expungement statute). Court may grant relief only if it finds “manifest injustice” to the petitioner, except where arrest was for a misdemeanor and the petitioner has no prior record:  

If the court finds that the continued existence and possible dissemination of information relating to the arrest of the petitioner causes or may cause circumstances which constitute a manifest injustice to the petitioner, it shall enter an order requiring the expungement of the police and court records, including electronic records, relating to the charge. Otherwise, it shall deny the petition.  However, if the petitioner has no prior criminal record and the arrest was for a misdemeanor violation, the petitioner shall be entitled, in the absence of good cause shown to the contrary by the Commonwealth, to expungement of the police and court records relating to the charge, and the court shall enter an order of expungement.

§ 19.2-392.2(F). The requirement of a hearing may be waived if government gives written notice to the court that he does not object to the petition and, when the charge to be expunged is a felony, “stipulates in such written notice that the continued existence and possible dissemination of information relating to the arrest of the petitioner causes or may cause circumstances which constitute a manifest injustice to the petitioner.” Id.  

Effective July 1, 2019, a petition need no longer be filed where a pardon was granted for innocence, and such a pardon remains grounds for automatic expungement.  See Va. Code § 19.2-392.2(I). 

Employers may not inquire about expunged non-conviction records or conviction records expunged in the case of a pardon for innocence. § 19.2-392.4.   Applicants are not required to disclose expunged records in response to any employment-related inquiry.   Id.   

Law enforcement access is also prohibited except that a court may order access upon “petition filed by the attorney for the Commonwealth alleging that the record is needed by a law-enforcement agency for purposes of employment application as an employee of a law-enforcement agency or for a pending criminal investigation and that the investigation will be jeopardized or that life or property will be endangered without immediate access to the record. . . ”  § 19.2-392.3(B).  “An ex parte order may permit a review of the record, but may not permit a copy to be made of it.”  Id. 

F.  Juvenile records

There is no mechanism for sealing juvenile records, but most juvenile court records are confidential and only accessible by statute or court order.  Court records are automatically destroyed annually if the juvenile is at least age 19 and five years have elapsed since the last hearing in any juvenile case.  Va. Code § 16.1-306(A). Automatic destruction is unavailable in several instances, including for most offenses that would constitute adult felonies.  § 16.1-307.  A person may deny the existence of a destroyed record, and it is a misdemeanor offense to access an expunged record. §§ 19.2-392.3(B), 19.2-392.4(A)–(B). Deferred adjudication and dismissal without an adjudication of guilt is available for most juvenile offenses.  See § 16.1-278.8.

G.  Sex offender registry

Va. Code § 9.1-910 (“Removal of name and information from Registry”).  Persons required to register, other than a person who has been convicted of any sexually violent offense, two or more offenses for which registration is required, or murder, “may petition the circuit court in which he was convicted or the circuit court in the jurisdiction where he then resides for removal of his name and all identifying information from the Registry.”  Minimum waiting period is 15 years, and for some offenses it is 25 years.  A petition may not be filed until all court ordered treatment, counseling, and restitution has been completed. The court holds a hearing on the petition at which the applicant and any interested persons may present witnesses and other evidence. The Commonwealth shall be made a party to any action under this section. “If, after such hearing, the court is satisfied that such person no longer poses a risk to public safety, the court shall grant the petition.” In the event the petition is not granted, the person shall wait at least 24 months from the date of the denial to file a new petition for removal from the Registry.

H.  Clean Slate law: Sealing of convictions and non-convictions  

The record sealing portions of HB2113/SB1339 are divided into three types: 1) automatic sealing, 2) contemporaneous sealing, and 3) petition-based sealing.  With one exception, all sealing authorities take effect July 1, 2025.  Police records for marijuana possession of one ounce or less will take effect July 1, 2021. See https://www.cannabis.virginia.gov/. 

   1)  Automatic sealing: Under the law as amended, charges that qualify for automatic sealing include:

    • Charges involving mistaken identity or unauthorized use of identifying information;
    • Deferred dismissals for possession of marijuana;
    • Convictions for the following misdemeanors: petit larceny, concealment, trespass after having been forbidden, instigating others to trespass, trespass on posted property, possession with the intent to distribute marijuana, possession of marijuana, and disorderly conduct; and
    • Misdemeanor non-convictions (excluding traffic infractions) unless the Commonwealth’s attorney objects on one of five specific grounds. There are some exceptions for non-convictions, such as when the charge is dropped as part of a plea agreement. Non-convictions that do not qualify for automatic sealing can still go through the petition-based process. 

See §§ 19.2-392.6, 19.2-392.7, 19.392.8(A). To qualify for automatic sealing, seven years must have passed since the conviction or deferred dismissal, the person must not have any new convictions during that time, and on the date of disposition, the person must not have been convicted of another offense that is ineligible for automatic sealing.

    2) Sealing at disposition: Felony acquittals and dismissals with prejudice can be sealed by the court immediately at the time of disposition, without filing a petition, “with the concurrence of” the Commonwealth’s attorney. § 19.2-392.8(B). If the prosecutor refuses or sealing is denied by the court, the individual can still petition to seal the record.

   3) Petition-based sealing: The greatly expanded petition-based sealing portion of the bill, codified in § 19.2-392.12, covers a broad range of offenses.

    • Nearly all other misdemeanor convictions, except DUI and domestic assault, are eligible if the person was not convicted of a new crime for a seven-year period after conviction or release from incarceration.
    • Class 5 felonies (1–10 years in prison), Class 6 felonies (1­–5 years in prison), and felony larceny convictions (except certain DUI offenses) are eligible for petition-based sealing if the person has not been convicted of any offense for a ten-year period after the conviction or release from incarceration, whichever is later.  There is a lifetime limit of two on the number of sentencing events that an individual can have sealed. § 19.2-392.12(C). A person must also never have been convicted of an offense that carries a maximum of life in prison if they want another low-level felony or misdemeanor conviction sealed.
    • Deferred dismissals for offenses other than marijuana and alcohol possession are also eligible for petition-based sealing. This is a change from the existing expungement law, which was designed to assist “an innocent person’s ability to obtain employment, an education and to obtain credit.” This is significant in light of a 2020 expansion of the deferred disposition law to include crimes against property for anyone not previously convicted of a felony.
    • No filing fee will be required in the case of indigency.
    • Procedures set forth in § 19.2-392.12(E) and (F); if prosecutor does not object, court need not hold a hearing; court must find “manifest injustice.”

Court-appointed legal assistance:  Individuals who cannot afford an attorney for help with the petition-based sealing process can request one. The bill establishes a Sealing Fee Fund, which will collect filing fees from individuals who can afford them and use that money to pay court-appointed attorneys. § 19.2-392.12(L).

Court debt no barrier:  Notably, court debt will not be a barrier to record clearance under the legislation (a provision requiring payment was omitted in the final bill) and court clerks will continue to have access to records for the purpose of collecting court debt owed by individuals after their record has been sealed. § 19.2-392.13(C)(xi). The legislation also removes the requirement that individuals seeking record clearance go to a law enforcement agency to get fingerprinted as part of the petition process, and the petitioner does not have to produce their criminal record. The prosecutor will supply both types of information instead.

Effect of sealing:  In general, sealed records may not be disclosed except pursuant to a court order, unless disclosure is specifically authorized by § 19.2-392.13(C). These 25 specific authorizations include various law enforcement and related employments, and any purpose for which a background check is required by federal, state or local law.

Regulation of private background screeners: The other major component of the bill addresses the regulation of private companies that buy and sell individuals’ criminal records. As advocates warned during the 2020 special session, these records can continue to appear on private background checks long after the public records have been sealed or expunged.

The bill takes several steps to alleviate this problem. § 19.2-392.16. First, private companies (defined as “business screening services” under the bill) have an obligation to delete sealed records and must take steps to ensure they do not maintain sealed or inaccurate records. Second, these companies must register with the Virginia State Police to receive electronic copies of sealed records. Third, the companies must include the date they collected an individual record when they disseminate it. Fourth, the companies must allow individuals to request a copy of their own criminal history record information from the company. Finally, individuals or the attorney general may initiate a civil action to enforce this section of the legislation, and the companies may be forced to pay damages if they violate it.

IV.  Criminal record in employment & licensing

A.  Ban-the-Box in public hiring

In 2020, HB757 added §§ 2.2-2812.1 and 15.2-1505.3 to the Virginia Code to limit inquiries by agencies of state and local government regarding criminal arrests, charges, or convictions on employment applications, unless the inquiry takes place during or after a staff interview of the prospective employee.  The prohibition does not apply to applications for law enforcement employment, or to state agencies that are expressly permitted to inquire into an individual’s criminal arrests or charges for employment purposes pursuant to any provision of federal or state law.  For localities, the prohibition also does not apply to positions for employment by the local school board.   

See also the discussion in the preceding section of restrictions on background screening companies imposed by the 2021 law. 

Application-stage inquiries into criminal history by executive branch agencies are also governed by a 2015 executive order which directs all state agencies to remove the question relating to criminal record from employment applications, and “encourages similar hiring practices among private employers operating within the Commonwealth and state government contractors.”  See Executive Order No. 41 (McAuliffe).   The order directed further that “state employment decisions will not be based on the criminal history of an individual unless demonstrably job-related and consistent with business necessity, or state or federal law prohibits hiring an individual with certain convictions for a particular position.”  A background check would be conducted only after a candidate has signed a waiver, has been “found otherwise eligible for the position,” and is “being considered for a specific position.”     

B.  Occupational licensing

The Department of Professional and Occupational Licensure is subject to the general nondiscrimination provision at Va. Code § 54.1-204 (“Prior convictions not to abridge rights”). With an important caveat, a person may not be refused a license or occupational/professional certificate “solely because of” a prior criminal conviction, unless the criminal conviction “directly relates” to the occupation or profession for which the license, certificate or registration is sought. However, a board “shall have the authority to refuse a license . . . if, based upon all the information available, including the applicant’s record of prior convictions, it finds that the applicant is unfit or unsuited to engaged in such occupation or  profession.” § 54.1-204(A). 

In determining whether a criminal conviction “directly relates” to an occupation or profession, the regulatory board shall consider the following criteria:

  1. The nature and seriousness of the crime;
  2. The relationship of the crime to the purpose for requiring a license to engage in the occupation;
  3. The extent to which the occupation or profession might offer an opportunity to engage in further criminal activity of the same type as that in which the person had been involved;
  4. The relationship of the crime to the ability, capacity or fitness required to perform the duties and discharge the responsibilities of the occupation or profession;
  5. The extent and nature of the person’s past criminal activity;
  6. The age of the person at the time of the commission of the crime;
  7. The amount of time that has elapsed since the person’s last involvement in the commission of a crime;
  8. The conduct and work activity of the person prior to and following the criminal activity; and
  9. Evidence of the person’s rehabilitation or rehabilitative effort while incarcerated or following release.

§ 54.1-204(B).

Notification of reasons for denial:

If an applicant is denied a registration, license or certificate because of the information appearing in his criminal history record, the regulatory board or department shall notify the applicant that information obtained from the Central Criminal Records Exchange contributed to such denial. The information shall not be disseminated except as provided for in this section.

§ 54.1-204(C). 

2022 proposed modifications of the occupational licensing law:  In 2022, two identical laws were enacted that, if reenacted in 2023 (as required by Virginia law), would have made a number of changes in the language governing how a board determined direct relationship.  These changes were intended to limit a board’s ability to reject applicants based on their criminal history. They would have expanded on the language in § 54.1-204(A) that relates to a finding of “direct relationship” both substantively and procedurally, and would have precluded consideration of certain “excluded” records, defined as “any conviction that has been sealed, annulled, dismissed, expunged, or pardoned.”  These two laws also modified the standards set forth in § 54.1-204(B) for determining “direct relationship.”  The laws would have required boards to “develop and publish on their website guidance documents that inform prospective applicants of the types of criminal offenses that may impede licensure, including specific convictions and application of the factors provided [to determine direct relationship].”  The new laws would have prohibited refusal of a license based on a conviction until the board

completes an individualized assessment of the individual’s criminal record and current circumstances and determines that the criminal conviction directly relates to the occupation or profession [for which the license is sought].   

See VA HB282 and SB409. The final language relating to a finding that “the applicant is unfit or unsuited to engage in such occupation or profession” would have been retained in the statute.  

Finally, these two bills would have amended § 54.1-114 to require the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation to include in its biennial report to the governor certain data related to the criminal history of applicants for each regulatory board, including the number of applicants with a criminal history and cases where denial of a license was based in whole or in part upon the existence of the applicant’s criminal record.  

However, both bills failed to be reenacted in the 2023 session. See SB 1227.  As a result, the language in § 54.1-204 as last amended in 2009, and described above, remains the law.  

 

  1. The restoration policy of Virginia’s governors evolved between 2013 and 2023 through a series of executive orders. Republican Robert McDonnell inaugurated a policy of restoring the vote automatically to all those eligible in 2013, following the conclusions of a task force convened by the Attorney General that the General Assembly cannot establish by statute a process for the automatic restoration of rights. Individuals convicted of non-violent offenses were eligible for relief immediately upon completion of their sentences, while those convicted of violent offenses were required to wait five years. Democratic Governor Terry McAuliffe restored the vote automatically to all those who had completed their sentences, including completion of parole or probation, and subsequently removed the condition that applicants must have paid court debt.  In 2016 the Virginia Supreme Court struck down Governor McAuliffe’s automatic restoration order in Howell v. McAuliffe. 292 Va. 320, 788 S.E.2d 706 (Va. 2016), and he responded by restoring the vote to more than 200,000 individuals through a series of executive orders in which they were individually listed. In March 2021, Democratic Governor Ralph Northam issued an executive order restoring the vote to 69,000 people who had been released from prison but had not yet completed their supervision, mirroring the provisions of a constitutional amendment that was pending in the legislature dujring this period but ultimately was not approved. The Brennan Center traces the evolution of Virginia’s restoration policies between 2013 and 2023.
  2. Because it was not properly raised, the Farnsworth court declined to consider whether the Full Faith and Credit clause precluded conviction after an out-of-state restoration of rights. 
  3. The waiting period was reduced by Governor McAuliffe from 10 years in 2016.
  4. For example, in 2009 Governor Kaine commuted Sharyn Harmon’s sentence, imposed in 2002, from one year of imprisonment (with all but ten days suspended) to five months’ incarceration (with all but ten days suspended), to enable her to avoid automatic deportation based on status as an aggravated felon.  See p. 39, https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2010/SD2/PDF    Similarly, in 2012 and 2013 Governor McDonnell commuted the sentences of Ramjit Kissoon so that his convictions would no longer be considered “aggravated felonies” resulting in automatic deportability.  See pp. 2, 3 of https://rga.lis.virginia.gov/Published/2013/SD2/PDF. Three of Governor Kaine’s simple pardons and one of Governor Warner’s were issued to individuals seeking pardon to avoid deportation, but as noted federal immigration authorities do not regard Virginia pardons as effective to avoid deportation.  Governor Gilmore issued three “absolute pardons” to individuals seeking pardon to avoid deportation.