Andrew Joseph Haefele v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 0508212

Halie Morgan kept two goats on zoned property where livestock was not permitted; county code enforcement told her to remove them.
On June 18, 2020, Morgan, Andrew Haefele, Donald Compton, and Charles McKinney were observed attacking the goats; neighbors recorded video of the assault.
Video evidence shows Haefele swinging a spiked club, using feed to lure goats, then hacking at one goat with a machete while Morgan’s dogs were encouraged to attack; the group laughed and joked during the assault.
Deputy search recovered two dead goats; necropsies showed multiple chop wounds and evidence the animals suffered before death; veterinary testimony condemned the killing methods.
At a bench trial Haefele was convicted of two counts of maliciously maiming the livestock of another (Va. Code § 18.2-144) and two counts of conspiracy to maliciously maim; he appealed claiming owner permission negated liability and that conspiracy failed without the underlying felony.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the substantive and conspiracy convictions and remanded for correction of a scrivener’s error in the sentencing order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth)	Defendant's Argument (Haefele)	Held
Whether Va. Code § 18.2-144 requires lack of owner consent	§ 18.2-144 penalizes maliciously wounding another’s livestock regardless of consent	The statute sits among property crimes and thus requires a trespass/absence of owner consent; owner permission negates the offense	Statute’s plain language lacks a consent requirement; court will not add words; conviction valid even with owner’s permission
Whether evidence established malice for § 18.2-144	Videos, use of deadly implements, deliberate acts, veterinary evidence of suffering support malice	Owner’s alleged permission meant Haefele believed his conduct lawful, negating malice	Malice may be inferred from deliberate, cruel use of deadly weapons and the conduct shown; evidence sufficient
Whether conspiracy convictions fail because the underlying felony was not proven	Conspiracy upheld because underlying malicious-maiming convictions are supported	Conspiracy fails if underlying felony not proven	Because the court affirmed the § 18.2-144 convictions, conspiracy convictions necessarily stand

Gerald v. Commonwealth, 295 Va. 469 (2018) (articulating appellate fact-viewing principles for criminal appeals)
Wright v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 754 (2009) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
Blake v. Commonwealth, 288 Va. 375 (2014) (legislative intent and text govern statutory construction)
City of Va. Beach v. ESG Enters., Inc., 243 Va. 149 (1992) (courts must apply statute’s words, not headings)
Hill v. Commonwealth, 73 Va. App. 206 (2021) (court may not add words to a plainly written statute)
Rickman v. Commonwealth, 294 Va. 531 (2017) (omission of limiting language signals legislative intent)
Haba v. Commonwealth, 73 Va. App. 277 (2021) (absence of limiting language indicates legislature did not intend such limits)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Canipe v. Commonwealth, 25 Va. App. 629 (1997) (malice may be proved by circumstantial evidence)
Synan v. Commonwealth, 67 Va. App. 173 (2017) (malice shown by purposeful, cruel acts)
Strickler v. Commonwealth, 241 Va. 482 (1991) (malice may be inferred from deliberate use of a deadly weapon)