Bowman v. Commonwealth
290 Va. 492
| Va. | 2015Background
- Bowman contracted April 30, 2012 to replace a pool liner for a total price of $4,200, with an $2,100 advance and $2,100 due after installation.
- homeowner gave Bowman a May 1, 2012 check for the $2,100 advance; Bowman estimated finishing by May 18, 2012, but no work occurred.
- homeowner later involved police; he sent a certified demand letter to Bowman which was returned undelivered.
- A second certified demand letter was sent to a different address; Bowman received it, but its contents were not introduced into evidence.
- At trial, the contents of the second letter were not established; Bowman claimed he did not receive a clear demand to return the advance.
- Conviction for construction fraud under Code § 18.2-200.1 was based on the supposed certified-letter notice, which this Court ultimately found insufficient to prove a required unqualified demand to return the advance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the demand letter satisfied the statute's unqualified return requirement | Commonwealth contends the notice could satisfy the statute by demanding return of the advance. | Bowman contends the statute requires an unqualified return demand; the second letter's contents were not proven. | Not satisfied; conviction reversed due to insufficient evidence of an unqualified return demand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Linnon v. Commonwealth, 287 Va. 92 (2014) (de novo review of legal element interpretation)
- Commonwealth v. Hudson, 265 Va. 505 (2003) (appellate review standards for sufficiency findings)
- Kelley v. Commonwealth, 289 Va. 463 (2015) (deference to credible evidence and inferences favorable to Commonwealth)
- Parks v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 492 (1980) (standard for appellate inference)
- Rader v. Commonwealth, 15 Va. App. 325 (1992) (fraudulent intent at the time of procuring advance)
- Holsapple v. Commonwealth, 266 Va. 593 (2003) (return of advance under statute; notice requirement)
- Jimenez v. Commonwealth, 241 Va. 244 (1991) (notice is a material element of 18.2-200.1)
- Station #2, LLC v. Lynch, 280 Va. 166 (2010) (promissory fraud analogue in contract context)
- McCary v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 119 (2003) (demands for return of monies; sufficiency considerations)