McGinnis v. Commonwealth

Summary

The Supreme Court of Virginia reviews Daniel Ernest McGinnis's convictions for three counts of larceny by worthless check under Code § 18.2-181. The court reverses the Court of Appeals' procedural ruling concerning preservation of the sufficiency challenge and assumes without deciding that the issue was properly before it. The opinion proceeds to address whether § 18.2-181 applies to checks issued for existing debts involving goods or services.

Holdings

1. The Court could assume without deciding that the circuit court's ruling on McGinnis's motion was properly before the Court of Appeals and resolve the appeal on the best and narrowest grounds.
2. The 1978 amendment did not limit Code § 18.2-181 to checks passed as present consideration for goods or services. Larceny by worthless check applies to the passing of any worthless check with intent to defraud, regardless of the object of the payment.
3. The evidence was sufficient to establish that McGinnis knew the checks were worthless when he delivered them and intended to defraud the Kirkley. The convictions were therefore affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court of Appeals correctly held that McGinnis's sufficiency assignment of error was not preserved under Rule 5A:18 because his post-verdict motion was signed by him rather than trial counsel.
2. Whether Code § 8.01-271.1 permits an attorney to cure, during the appeal, the absence of an attorney signature on a motion signed by a represented criminal defendant.
3. Whether the 1978 amendment to Code § 18.2-181 limited larceny by worthless check to checks delivered as present consideration for goods or services.
4. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that McGinnis knowingly delivered worthless checks with intent to defraud, in violation of Code § 18.2-181.

Disposition

reversed