Personal injury
$730,000
Passenger injury recovery
We recovered $730,000 for a passenger injured when a vehicle turned into oncoming traffic.
Meet our personal injury attorney: Maxie Lawton
Read case detailsA racing allegation in Virginia is not just another way of describing a speeding ticket. Virginia Code § 46.2-865 has separate racing and exhibition-driving provisions, and the subsection matters for both the charge and the possible license consequences. Start with the section printed on the summons, warrant, or indictment rather than a label such as “street racing.”
This guide focuses on the racing provision in subsection B. It explains the statutory structure, identifies questions for an attorney’s review, and separates racing from neighboring traffic offenses. It does not decide whether particular conduct proves a race or whether a defense applies.
Section 46.2-865(B) addresses a race between two or more motor vehicles on Virginia highways or on the driveway or premises of a church, school, recreational facility, or business property open to the public. The text includes an exception for authorization by the property owner or the owner’s agent.
The location and any claimed authorization require careful review. “Private property” is not a blanket exemption, and permission concerning an event should not be treated as immunity from other offenses. This overview is not a complete statement of the legal elements or proof required in a particular case.
Racing and reckless driving by speed are different statutory theories. The numerical speeding thresholds do not replace the racing inquiry. Nor should two vehicles traveling near each other be treated, from that description alone, as a legal determination that a race occurred.
Subsection B is the racing provision; subsection C is the exhibition-driving provision. Subsection A supplies an exhibition-driving definition that includes specified intentional conduct near a group of two or more people. That definition is not a substitute for analyzing a subsection B racing charge.
The distinction also matters after a conviction: subsection F supplies the racing-specific license provision, while subsection G supplies the exhibition-driving license provision. This page does not provide a complete exhibition-driving guide. If the paperwork cites subsection C, the racing-specific discussion below should not be applied to it automatically.
A violation of the racing provision is reckless driving. Section 46.2-868(A) generally classifies reckless driving under this article as a Class 1 misdemeanor. Under § 18.2-11(a), the authorized maximum is 12 months in jail, a fine of $2,500, or both.
Those are maximum authorized punishments, not an expected sentence. Special felony provisions and separate charges can change the analysis. An accusation is not a conviction, and a general penalty summary does not establish the outcome of an individual case.
For a conviction under subsection B, § 46.2-865(F) requires a court-imposed license suspension of six months to two years, or permits the court, in its discretion and for good cause, to require enrollment in the Intelligent Speed Assistance Program for six months to two years. This is the racing-specific rule; a suspension range taken from a different reckless-driving provision is not interchangeable.
The program alternative does not mean unrestricted driving or a guarantee that the ordinary license remains unsuspended. Section 46.2-507(C) directs DMV to suspend the ordinary license and issue a restricted license reflecting program participation. Eligibility, the court’s order, equipment requirements, and compliance obligations require individual review.
Section 46.2-865(F) also states that neither a restricted license issued nor program enrollment required under that section permits operation of a commercial motor vehicle. This article does not supply an application process or permission to drive. Other orders, prior convictions, and separate offenses may create additional licensing consequences.
Section 46.2-866 separately makes aiding or abetting a race or exhibition driving a Class 1 misdemeanor, even when the person is not engaged in the race or exhibition driving.
Section 46.2-865 also contains separate provisions addressing a person who purposefully rides on a vehicle’s hood or roof during prohibited conduct, and a person who purposefully impedes or attempts to impede traffic for that conduct. A driver’s charge should not be assumed to describe every other person’s alleged role. Being described as a passenger or spectator is not, by itself, a complete legal analysis.
Section 46.2-865.1 contains separate felony provisions involving serious bodily injury or death during prohibited racing or exhibition driving. Those provisions have additional conduct and causation requirements. An allegation that a crash occurred should not be substituted for analysis of those requirements.
Section 46.2-867 addresses seizure and forfeiture of a vehicle in specified circumstances. It is not a rule that every racing accusation automatically results in forfeiture. Vehicle-related notices and proceedings need their own review; this guide does not explain forfeiture procedure or determine a vehicle owner’s rights.
Before an attorney evaluates the matter, it helps to distinguish the following information in documents already available to you:
This is a document-orientation list, not an instruction to investigate witnesses, obtain another person’s records, or decide what evidence proves. Do not send confidential documents through an unapproved channel. This article cannot excuse a court appearance or replace advice about an individual deadline or order.
The broader Virginia reckless-driving guide addresses the regional reckless-driving framework. The Virginia traffic guide helps distinguish other traffic allegations, while the DMV point-system guide addresses points and driving-record questions. These are separate subjects from the racing-specific court provision.
This article provides general Virginia legal information, not legal advice or a prediction of results. It does not provide a complete elements, defense, exhibition-driving, felony, forfeiture, juvenile, commercial-license, or out-of-state analysis. The law applicable to an older incident may differ from the text discussed here.
Source research: October 10, 2026, using the linked official Virginia Code public text. This limited statutory overview does not include an independent Shepard’s or KeyCite subsequent-treatment check.
Tell us what happened, or call 757-777-9285.
An inquiry does not create an attorney-client relationship; representation requires our agreement. Please wait for instructions before sending confidential or time-sensitive material.
"*" indicates required fields
1807 S. Church Street, Suite 200C
Smithfield, VA 23430
2 Eaton Street, Suite 900
Hampton, VA 23669
Copyright © 2026 The Phoenix Trial Firm• All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy. Digital Marketing By:
A welcome from our team
Welcome to The Phoenix Trial Firm. We help people across Hampton Roads with personal injury, criminal defense, DUI, and serious traffic matters. Tell us what brought you here, and our team will help you understand your next steps.
Get a Free Consultation Or call 757-777-9285Hampton Roads trial lawyers
We help injured people and those facing criminal, DUI, or serious traffic charges across Hampton Roads.
Offices in Hampton & Smithfield
Your first conversation
Choose the matter you want to discuss. See how to get started and what to have ready for the conversation.

Start with the collision, your questions, and the changes it has brought to your life.
Good to knowYou do not need every document to make your first inquiry.
Start a conversationTell us when and where the collision happened and how to reach you. A short description is enough to begin an inquiry.
Our team reviews your inquiry. The conversation can cover your injuries, treatment, missed work, insurance questions, and possible next steps.
If we agree to represent you, we explain the scope of our work, fees and costs, and the information needed to begin preparing your claim.

A focused first conversation starts with the matter, the court, and your immediate questions.
Good to knowThis guide introduces the firm’s inquiry process; it does not change any court instruction or deadline.
Start a conversationTell us the charge, the locality or court, and any upcoming court date. Include your contact information so our team can review your inquiry.
Have your charging papers and questions ready for the conversation. We can discuss whether Phoenix is available to review your matter and what a consultation would cover.
If we agree to represent you, we explain the scope of the work and the fee arrangement. Preparation then begins around your particular facts and circumstances.

The details on the summons help us understand the matter you want to discuss.
Good to knowFor DUI or DWI inquiries, choose Criminal defense & DUI above. This overview does not determine whether you must appear in court. That question requires a review of your specific matter.
Start a conversationTell us the charge description, locality or court, and date shown on your summons or later court notice. For speed-related matters, note the alleged speed and posted limit.
Our team reviews your inquiry so we can discuss the circumstances and possible next steps. Mention any work-related driving or license concerns you want considered.
If we agree to represent you, we explain the work covered and the fee arrangement. Your case is prepared around its specific charge, evidence, and circumstances.
Our clients. Our work.
We represent people facing injury, criminal charges, and serious traffic matters. Here are seven outcomes from our work.
Personal injury
Passenger injury recovery
We recovered $730,000 for a passenger injured when a vehicle turned into oncoming traffic.
Meet our personal injury attorney: Maxie Lawton
Read case detailsCriminal defense & DUI
DUI: second offense
Not guilty of second-offense DUI. A conviction on the separate refusal charge remained.
Read case detailsCriminal defense
Strangulation — Chesapeake Circuit Court
The strangulation charge was dismissed. The separate domestic assault and battery charge received a first-offender deferred disposition.
Read case detailsCriminal defense
Felony eluding
The Commonwealth chose not to proceed with the felony-eluding prosecution. Driver identification was the central issue.
Read case detailsCriminal defense
Domestic assault and battery
The court dismissed the charge after considering the client’s testimony, injury photographs, and cross-examination.
Read case detailsCriminal defense
Firearm charges · preliminary hearing
Both charges were dismissed at the Norfolk preliminary hearing and were not certified to circuit court.
Read case detailsSerious traffic
Reckless driving
A challenge to the radar evidence led to a granted motion to strike and dismissal of the reckless-driving charge.
Read case detailsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Passenger injury recovery
Our client was a passenger in a vehicle when the driver turned into oncoming traffic. A severe arm injury required emergency surgery.
The vehicle’s policy provided $250,000 in coverage. Phoenix pursued an underinsured motorist claim and stacked multiple policies for an additional $480,000 in coverage.
We recovered $730,000 for our client.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Second-offense DUI and a separate refusal charge
A stop for failing to obey a highway lane marking led to charges of second-offense DUI and refusal of an official breath test.
The officer reported a slight odor of alcohol and slightly slurred speech. There were no field-sobriety or chemical test results. Phoenix challenged whether the evidence proved DUI beyond a reasonable doubt.
The court found the client not guilty of second-offense DUI because the evidence did not establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The client was convicted of the separate refusal charge.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Chesapeake Circuit Court
Our client faced strangulation and domestic assault and battery charges in Chesapeake Circuit Court following a physical altercation with a partner.
Dante Wright cross-examined the complainant about the reported effects of the altercation. The testimony included no loss of consciousness, no neck marks or bruising, and no hospital treatment or documented neck injury. The defense challenged whether the evidence established the bodily injury required for the strangulation charge and moved to strike.
The court granted the motion to strike and dismissed the strangulation charge. On the separate domestic assault and battery charge, the court found sufficient evidence but granted a first-offender deferred disposition. That charge was not dismissed at this stage.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Felony eluding
A vehicle registered to our client was clocked at more than 100 mph and crashed near a wooded area after police gave chase. It was empty when the officer arrived. Our client was charged with felony eluding.
The vehicle’s registration and personal items linked it to our client, but the officer had no description identifying him as the driver. Phoenix challenged whether the evidence established who was driving. Our client reported the vehicle stolen that night and said he was elsewhere with a sibling.
The Commonwealth chose not to proceed with the felony-eluding charge, which was resolved by nolle prosequi in circuit court.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Navy servicemember · Newport News
Our client, a Navy servicemember, faced a domestic assault and battery charge involving her child’s father.
Dante Wright called our client to testify about the incident, introduced photographs showing bruising and redness on her neck and injuries to her face, and cross-examined the complainant.
The Newport News Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court dismissed the charge. Considering our client’s injuries and the absence of evidence of significant injuries to the complainant, the judge could not determine who was the aggressor.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Norfolk General District Court
Our client faced charges of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and second-offense carrying a concealed weapon at a preliminary hearing in Norfolk General District Court.
Dante Wright cross-examined the officers about the evidence linking our client to the firearm. Officers found an object resembling a gun holster on our client, but no firearm. The gun was recovered elsewhere outside an apartment complex, away from our client. No link to the client or the holster was established; fingerprint testing was inconclusive, and no DNA evidence connected him to the firearm.
Both charges were dismissed at the preliminary hearing and were not certified to circuit court.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
A challenge to the radar evidence
Our client faced a reckless-driving charge involving a radar speed measurement.
At trial, the officer could not confirm that the radar had been checked before and after the shift and found accurate. No calibration certificate was presented. Dante Wright moved to strike the evidence.
The court granted the motion to strike and dismissed the reckless-driving charge.
View our case resultsPast results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Answers before your first call
Understand the records to preserve, insurance questions to ask, and how we help injured drivers and passengers.
Read the car-accident guide →Follow the process from investigation and treatment documentation through negotiation and, when appropriate, litigation.
Explore the claim process →Get to know Phoenix
Meet the people behind the firm and learn what to expect when you reach out.
A quick introduction from Dante Wright