A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter 13 of Title 9.1 a section numbered 9.1-1302, relating to Domestic and Sexual Assault Conviction Database created; procedures.
HB874 would require the Superintendent of State Police to create and maintain a public Domestic and Sexual Assault Conviction Database on the Department of State Police website. The database would include identifying and conviction information for people convicted of a second or subsequent qualifying domestic violence- or sexual assault-related offense when the victim was a family or household member or an intimate partner. Required information would include the person’s name, year of birth, physical description, recent photograph, conviction date, jurisdiction, age at conviction, offense, Code section, and punishment imposed.
The bill also creates a process for removal from the database. A listed person may petition for removal if the conviction has been expunged or if the person has gone seven years without another qualifying conviction, but only after completing all court-ordered treatment, counseling, and restitution. The circuit court would review the petition, obtain the petitioner’s criminal history, hold a hearing, and grant removal only if it finds the person does not pose a risk to public safety. If denied, the person must wait 24 months before filing again. The State Police would also be required to post instructions on how to seek removal and the standards for approval, and the database must be completed by July 1, 2027.
HB874 would add a new section to Title 9.1 of the Code of Virginia and direct the State Police to build a publicly accessible conviction database focused on repeat domestic and sexual assault offenders. It would affect state law enforcement recordkeeping, public disclosure of criminal conviction information, and circuit court procedures for petition-based removal from the database. The bill would also create a new public-facing mechanism that could affect convicted individuals’ privacy and reputational interests, while giving the public access to information intended to improve awareness and safety.
No committee transcript or recorded vote information is available, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears aimed at public safety and transparency, with a process for removal that may have been designed to address fairness and rehabilitation concerns. Its referral to Appropriations and subsequent remaining in that committee suggests it did not advance, but the reason for that outcome is not provided.
The main point of contention likely concerns the balance between public safety and individual privacy or rehabilitation. Supporters would likely favor public access to information about repeat domestic and sexual assault convictions as a tool for awareness and prevention, while opponents may argue that a public database could stigmatize individuals, expose sensitive personal information, or duplicate existing criminal justice records. The removal process may also draw scrutiny because it requires court review, proof of completed treatment and restitution, and a finding that the person no longer poses a risk to public safety.