Legislation under consideration at the General Assembly would allow for the sealing of criminal complaint affidavits that provide the basis for arrests in Virginia.

The bill would allow prosecutors to ask judges to seal such affidavits on a temporary basis for “good cause shown” — though it doesn’t provide a time frame for how long “temporary” can be.

But if it becomes law, the legislation could greatly reduce the information that the public can obtain about crimes in their communities.

Given that Virginia’s open records law allows law enforcement agencies to shield even basic police reports from the public, reporters statewide often depend on criminal complaints for information.

The criminal complaint affidavits — typically between a couple of paragraphs and a couple pages long — are attached to arrest warrants. They’re designed to spell out a police officer’s probable cause for bringing criminal charges..

The complaints typically include details on how a crime was carried out and solved. They outline some of the primary evidence against a defendant. And they often reveal motivations for the crimes, such as how an argument, robbery or failed drug deal led to a killing.

Without such affidavits, the information about a crime is often limited to the sparse details on the arrest warrant itself — such as the date of the crime, the person arrested, and the law they are accused of violating.

Two Lynchburg Republicans, Del. Eric R. Zehr and Del. Wendell S. Walker, filed identical legislation to allow for sealing the complaints after being approached by Lynchburg Commonwealth’s Attorney Bethany Harrison.

In an interview Friday, Harrison said Lynchburg police have complained about issues arising “when the media gets ahold immediately of the criminal complaint that puts out specific facts about some of our more sensitive cases.”

“Our concern is for the safety of our victims, witnesses, preservation of evidence, not tainting a potential jury pool, things of that nature,” she said.

For example, Harrison said, affidavits can include information provided by crucial cooperating witnesses, which she asserted can lead to problems even if the complaints don’t name those witnesses.

“We hear the jail calls of people calling other people, telling them to destroy evidence, telling them to go harass and intimidate witnesses,” Harrison said. “They’ll call someone and be like, ‘Go to this person’s house and offer money’ … or go find my box and bury it in the backyard.”

The complaints can also tip off co-defendants about the details of an investigation still in progress, she said.

But there’s significant concern that the pending legislation could greatly reduce crucial information flow to the public.

“We are concerned that this will cut off an avenue the public and press currently have, and have had for a long time, to learn about crimes and criminal activity in their communities,” said Megan Rhyne, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government.

Steve Stewart, the publisher of the Smithfield Times in Isle of Wight County and a member of the coalition’s board of directors, finds the legislation “troubling,” saying it would be harmful to the public.

He notes that an arrest warrant in itself “tells you very little” about a crime.

“The criminal complaints that are attached, that’s where the meat is,” Stewart said. “Information contained in these supporting complaints is vital to the citizenry. In the case of violent crimes, these complaints contain really important public safety information. People absolutely have the right to know about something in their neighborhood, period.”

Apart from being the Smithfield Times’ publisher, Stewart is also chief executive officer of Boone Newsmedia, which owns seven community newspapers in the southern states. As a publisher, Stewart said he emphasizes “holding public officials accountable to the citizens they serve.”

A few years ago, Stewart said, a woman filed a sexual assault complaint against a sitting member of the Smithfield Town Council, leading to criminal charges.

“We knew very little from the arrest warrant,” Stewart said. “But we went to the courthouse and got a copy of the supporting complaint, which contained great detail. And so we were able to tell a full story about it.”

The councilman ended up pleading guilty before trial. Without the information from the complaint, Stewart said, “we would not have been able to inform our community fully about a charge against a sitting elected official.”

Arrest warrants in Virginia are issued by magistrates sitting in each locality or region — with complainants making their allegations in sworn statements.

If a magistrate determines there’s sufficient probable cause for the arrest, he or she issues a warrant. Once an arrest is made, both the warrant and accompanying affidavit become part of the public file at local courthouses.

Though Virginia law once allowed police officers and sheriff’s offices to swear out felony arrest warrants orally, many departments and magistrates statewide have long required officers put those complaints down on paper as part of their standard process for obtaining warrants.

A new state law hit the books in July 2024, requiring officers to write out criminal complaints for all felony cases without exception. Written complaints are also required for certain misdemeanors, such as DUIs and domestic assaults, with many departments doing it for nearly all cases.

But Harrison, the Lynchburg commonwealth’s attorney, said Lynchburg police typically did not typically write out their felony arrest warrants before the 2024 change — leading to concerns as they began doing so more often.

For example, she said police had to do “damage control” in a sexual assault case involving a teenage victim. When details of the case began emerging in the press, the girl’s mother was upset.

“It was a shock to her,” Harrison said. “Like, ‘Whoa, I didn’t know my family’s business was going to be like, bam, here on the nightly news.’”

Police had to “smooth it over with her” to keep the case on track.

Harrison said the legislation, which has the backing of the Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys, is modeled on similar rules for sealing search warrants.

Though the legislation allows for the “temporary” sealing of the criminal complaints, it does not spell out any time limits on how long the sealing could be granted.

“This is a temporary sealing while the investigation continues,” Harrison said. “It’s not to be used for every single case, but for select cases where you have these particular issues.”

Defendants’ lawyers could file motions asking judges to unseal the complaints — even as prosecutors can seek extensions.

Harrison asserted that prosecutors statewide would not have the time or inclination to ask for sealing in all their criminal cases. Judges, she said, would serve as the check on the system to prevent abuse.

But Stewart, the Smithfield Times’ publisher, worries that if the bill becomes law, small town judges will lean heavily on the side of prosecutors making sealing requests.

“I can only hope that judges would use great discretion in granting orders to seal these complaints,” he said. “It’s just very troubling that we might lose access to them.”

The two House bills have been merged into one, with the legislation expected to be taken up next week by a subcommittee of the House Courts of Justice Committee.

Peter Dujardin, 757-897-2062, pdujardin@dailypress.com

https://www.pilotonline.com/2026/02/07/criminal-complaints-seal-general-assembly/