Bottoms v. Com., 704 S.E.2d 406

Bottoms was indicted in Dinwiddie County for two counts of construction fraud under Va. Code § 18.2-200.1; he pleaded guilty on Jan. 10, 2008, after a plea agreement was mentioned to the circuit court.
During the guilty-plea colloquy, Bottoms admitted guilt and stated he had consulted with his attorney and understood the range of possible sentences and waivers of appeal.
The circuit court continued with sentencing after accepting the plea, and a presentence report was ordered.
Bottoms later, through new counsel, moved (May 15, 2008) to withdraw the guilty plea under Code § 19.2-296, alleging depression and lack of prescribed medication at the plea time.
A hearing in June 2008 addressed the withdrawal motion; the court declined to hear psychiatric witnesses, noting Bottoms had denied any disability during the plea, and later continued sentencing.
Bottoms filed a motion to reconsider (Aug. 5, 2008) asserting medication issues and lack of a factual basis for the plea; the court denied reconsideration (Oct. 10, 2008). The January 7, 2009 sentencing imposed concurrent ten-year terms with partial suspensions and restitution.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper standard for Code § 19.2-296 motions	Bottoms asserts Justus governs, requiring a case-specific, good-faith showing of a reasonable defense.	Commonwealth contends the plea colloquy sufficiency controls, so withdrawal should be denied.	Justus standard applies; not merely relying on plea colloquy.
Whether Bottoms showed a reasonable defense to justify withdrawal	Bottoms' lack-of-intent defenses to construction fraud were reasonable and not merely dilatory.	Defense was vague/insufficient to overcome the plea.	Bottoms demonstrated a reasonable defense to go to trial; withdrawal proper.
Impact of timing and evidence on withdrawal decision	Motion filed timely before sentencing; additional evidence supported a potential trial on not-guilty.	Court should deny based on prior knowing and voluntary plea.	Trial court abused discretion by not permitting withdrawal.

Justus v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 143 (2007) (pre-sentencing standard: weigh defense against mere dilatory or formal defenses)
Parris v. Commonwealth, 189 Va. 321 (1949) (withdrawal permitted where plea was entered under mistake or coercion; reasonable grounds to go to trial)
Holsapple v. Commonwealth, 266 Va. 593 (2003) (intent to defraud may be inferred from conduct and timing of work under construction fraud)
Klink v. Commonwealth, 12 Va. App. 815 (1991) (intent requirement in construction fraud case and standards for proof)