The civic record
Read. Follow. Verify.West Virginia creates felony offense for electronic threats causing public alarm and imposes release distance restrictions
Last action · March 12, 2026: Postponed indefinitelySponsors: Robbie Morris and 3 others
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
What This Bill Proposed
West Virginia Senate Bill 473 establishes a new felony offense for using an electronic communication device to threaten a that causes building evacuations, serious public alarm, or significant disruption, carrying penalties of one to 10 years in prison and fines up to $10,000. The measure also sets misdemeanor penalties for general harassing or threatening communications and prohibits individuals convicted of the felony offense from being within 3,000 feet of the affected location or victim during any period of pretrial or post-conviction release.
The measure alters criminal liability and sentencing ranges for electronic communications, increasing potential prison time from months in jail to up to a decade in state correctional facilities for qualifying threats. It also restricts the residential and employment locations of released defendants relative to victims or threatened sites.
- Senate Bill 473 was introduced during the 2026 Regular Session of the West Virginia Legislature by Senators Morris, Hamilton, Woelfel, and Deeds. context
Who It Would Have Affected
Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.
Individuals using electronic communication devices
Senders face new felony charges and enhanced criminal penalties for transmitting threats of violence that cause public alarm or disruption.
Defendants released on bail, probation, or parole
Released individuals charged or convicted under the felony provision are prohibited from residing, working, or being within 3,000 feet of the threatened location or victims.
Lenders and debt collectors
Debt collection communications regarding overdue debts that comply with existing consumer credit laws are explicitly exempted from certain contact restrictions.
Key Facts
- Establishes a felony offense for using an electronic communication device to threaten a crime of violence that causes an evacuation, serious public alarm, or significant disruption.
- Punishes the new felony offense with a fine of $2,500 to $10,000, confinement in a state correctional facility for one to 10 years, or both.
- Requires the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew or should have known the communication would be viewed as a threat.
- Prohibits individuals charged or convicted under the new felony provision and released on bail, probation, or parole from residing, working, or being within 3,000 feet of the threatened location or victim during release.
Show all 8 facts
- Maintains that a defendant's inability to actually complete the threatened violence is not a valid defense against prosecution.
- Sets misdemeanor penalties for general anonymous, harassing, or threatening communications, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $500 fine for a first offense.
- Increases misdemeanor penalties for second or subsequent offenses to a fine up to $1,000, confinement up to one year, or both.
- Exempts legitimate communications made by lenders or debt collectors regarding overdue debts that comply with state consumer protection codes from violating the general contact-after-notice restriction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What constitutes a felony under this bill?
Can someone be convicted if they lacked the ability to carry out the threat?
Are debt collectors affected by the contact restrictions?
What else do you want to know?
News Coverage
Follow the record
Votes, people, money & the original sourceWhere This Stands
This bill did not become law - Died at adjournment · passed the Senate · on the House floor.
Procedural history
29 actions- Mar 12, 2026HousePostponed indefinitely
- Mar 12, 2026HouseMotion to postpone indefinitely
- Mar 11, 2026HousePostponed on 3rd reading, Special Calendar, until 3/12/2026
- Mar 11, 2026HouseOn 3rd reading, Special Calendar
- Mar 10, 2026HouseCommittee amendment adopted (Voice vote)
- Mar 10, 2026HouseAmendment reported by the Clerk
Show 23 earlier actions
- Mar 10, 2026HouseRead 2nd time
- Mar 10, 2026HouseOn 2nd reading, Special Calendar
- Mar 9, 2026HouseRead 1st time
- Mar 9, 2026HouseImmediate consideration
- Mar 9, 2026HouseWith amendment, do pass
- Mar 5, 2026HouseMarkup Discussion
- Feb 12, 2026HouseCommitteeTo House Judiciary
- Feb 12, 2026HouseCommitteeTo Judiciary
- Feb 12, 2026HouseIntroducedIntroduced in House
- Feb 12, 2026HouseHouse received Senate message
- Feb 10, 2026SenateOrdered to House
- Feb 10, 2026SenateFloorPassed Senate (Roll No. 60)
- Feb 10, 2026SenateRead 3rd time
- Feb 10, 2026SenateOn 3rd reading
- Feb 9, 2026SenateRead 2nd time
- Feb 9, 2026SenateOn 2nd reading
- Feb 6, 2026SenateRead 1st time
- Feb 6, 2026SenateOn 1st reading
- Feb 5, 2026SenateCommittee substitute reported
- Jan 19, 2026SenateCommitteeTo Judiciary
- Jan 19, 2026SenateIntroducedIntroduced in Senate
- Jan 19, 2026SenateCommitteeTo Judiciary
- Jan 19, 2026SenateIntroducedFiled for introduction
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →Lobbying Activity
No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.
Full breakdown
Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.
Sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Expansion of Computer Crime Act to Include Felony Threats
The measure shifts certain threatening electronic communications from general misdemeanor offenses to specific felony charges when public alarm or evacuation occurs.
Connected Entities
Sources
www.wvlegislature.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance20Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 75)
- Controversy60Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment10Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz45Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools