Romeo and Juliet Law Virginia

Virginia has no statute called a Romeo and Juliet law. There is no general close-in-age exemption in Virginia that makes otherwise-criminal conduct lawful because the two people are near each other in age. What Virginia has instead is a grading rule inside Va. Code § 18.2-63. Subsection B provides that where the accused is a minor and the consenting child is three or more years his junior, the offense is a Class 6 felony, and where the child is less than three years his junior, it is a Class 4 misdemeanor. That subsection lowers the class of the offense. It does not erase the offense, it is not a defense, and it is not an exemption from prosecution. If you came to this page believing Virginia protects conduct between two people close in age, the correction matters, because the belief and the statute point in different directions. For questions about a specific charge, call Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C. at (888) 437-7747.

On this page

What the Grading Rule in Va. Code § 18.2-63(B) Actually Does

Va. Code § 18.2-63 addresses carnal knowledge of a child 13 or older but under 15 without force. Subsection A treats that offense as a Class 4 felony. Subsection B addresses the situation where the person accused is himself a minor, and it assigns a different class depending on the age gap between the two people.

Under subsection B, where the accused is a minor and the consenting child is three or more years his junior, the offense is a Class 6 felony. Where the child is less than three years his junior, it is a Class 4 misdemeanor.

Read carefully, that language does one thing. It moves the offense from one classification to another. It does not permit the conduct, create an exception to the section, or give the accused something to raise against the charge. The conduct still falls within Va. Code § 18.2-63. What changes is the level at which Virginia grades it.

The distinction matters in practice because a person who believes he is covered by an exemption may speak freely to investigators, assume no case exists, or delay getting counsel. A person who understands that subsection B affects only classification approaches the same facts differently. The age gap is a factual question established from records, and a difference of a few months can move a matter between the two halves of subsection B.

What the Rule Does Not Reach

Subsection B is written around an accused who is a minor. It does not extend to an adult, and Virginia has a separate section for conduct involving older teenagers.

Va. Code § 18.2-371 makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor for any person 18 or older who engages in consensual sexual intercourse, anal intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, or anilingus with a child 15 or older who is not his spouse, child, or grandchild. Nothing in that section reduces the offense because the two people are close in age. Turning 18 does not carry a close-in-age protection across that birthday, because no such protection exists.

Registration is a separate question and is not answered by the grading rule either. Va. Code § 9.1-902 subsection D allows discretionary registration for juveniles over 13 who are adjudicated delinquent on or after July 1, 2005. Discretionary means a court may order it, not that it follows automatically and not that it is unavailable. A reduced classification under Va. Code § 18.2-63(B) does not by itself resolve that issue.

Taken together, these sections show why the phrase Romeo and Juliet law is misleading in Virginia. It suggests a category of protected conduct. The statutes describe a category of graded conduct instead, and grading and legality are not the same thing.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Virginia have a Romeo and Juliet law?

No. Virginia has no statute by that name and no general close-in-age exemption that makes otherwise-criminal conduct lawful. The provision people usually have in mind is Va. Code § 18.2-63 subsection B, which changes the class of the offense where the accused is a minor. It is a grading rule. Treating it as an exemption leads people to conclusions the statutory text does not support.

What does Va. Code § 18.2-63(B) say?

Subsection B provides that where the accused is a minor and the consenting child is three or more years his junior, the offense is a Class 6 felony, and where the child is less than three years his junior, it is a Class 4 misdemeanor. It sits inside a section addressing carnal knowledge of a child 13 or older but under 15 without force, which subsection A treats as a Class 4 felony.

Is subsection B a defense I can raise?

It is not written as a defense. Subsection B assigns a classification to conduct that already falls within Va. Code § 18.2-63. Whether any defense exists in a particular case depends on the facts, the evidence, and the charging documents, and that assessment belongs with a defense lawyer who has reviewed the actual file rather than with a general description of the statute.

Does the age gap have to be exactly three years?

Subsection B draws its line at three years. Where the consenting child is three or more years the accused’s junior, the offense is a Class 6 felony. Where the child is less than three years his junior, it is a Class 4 misdemeanor. Because the line is fixed, dates of birth and the date of the alleged conduct become factual questions that have to be established rather than estimated.

Does the rule apply if the older person is 18?

Subsection B is written around an accused who is a minor, so it does not reach an adult. Where the person is 18 or older and the child is 15 or older, Va. Code § 18.2-371 applies and makes the listed consensual conduct a Class 1 misdemeanor unless the child is his spouse, child, or grandchild. Reaching the age of 18 changes which section is in play.

Does a reduced classification avoid sex offender registration?

It does not answer that question on its own. Va. Code § 9.1-902 subsection D allows discretionary registration for juveniles over 13 adjudicated delinquent on or after July 1, 2005. Discretionary means a court may order registration in an appropriate case. Anyone concerned about registration should raise it with counsel early, because it is decided separately from the classification of the offense.

Why do people think Virginia has this law?

The phrase circulates in general discussion and in online summaries that do not identify which state they describe, so a person searching for Virginia information often reads material written about somewhere else. The label also sounds like a protection, which makes it easy to assume. The result is a widely held belief that does not match the Virginia code, which is why this page states the position plainly at the start rather than at the end.

What should a family do after a juvenile is accused?

Treat the matter as a criminal case rather than a misunderstanding that will resolve itself. Preserve records that establish dates of birth and the dates involved, avoid discussing the allegation with investigators before speaking with counsel, and get the charging documents reviewed. The classification questions described on this page depend on facts that need to be documented rather than recalled loosely months later.

Mr. Sris, Owner and Founder of Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C., is a former prosecutor and is admitted in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York. The firm has practiced since 1997 and concentrates in criminal defense, including juvenile matters and allegations under the Virginia sections discussed on this page. Mr. Sris and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys work from the charging documents, the dates alleged, and the ages of both people, because those facts determine which subsection applies and what a court may consider. The firm maintains 24/7 phone intake. Request a consultation. Call (888) 437-7747.

This page provides general information and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Case results depend on a variety of factors unique to each case. Results may vary.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.