Kyle Cornelia Leftwich, a/k/a Kyle L. Banning v. Commonwealth of Virginia
61 Va. App. 422
| Va. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Leftwich was an attorney at Marks & Harrison from 1994 to 2010, focusing on Social Security disability claims.
- Employment agreements provided that fees earned were the property of M&H and that Leftwich would render full-time professional services for the firm.
- She represented clients before the SSA, receiving U.S. Treasury checks payable to her at the firm’s address as compensation for her services.
- In June 2010, the firm discovered missing checks—approximately 103 checks totaling over $430,000—not deposited into the firm’s account.
- Leftwich admitted someone tampered with the books and forged receipts; she later confessed to diverting funds.
- The firm settled with Leftwich in August 2010 for $450,000, stating the checks were the firm’s property and Leftwich must remit them.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence proves embezzlement under first prong of § 18.2-111 | Leftwich received funds for the firm and used them for herself. | The checks were not entrusted to Leftwich by SSA for the firm’s benefit. | Conviction affirmed; first prong satisfied by receiving firm funds, regardless of entrustment. |
| Whether entrustment analysis is required under § 18.2-111 | Entrustment to Leftwich by SSA may be necessary to convict. | Entrustment is the central notion; SSA did not entrust the checks for firm benefit. | No; conviction valid under first prong alone; entrustment analysis not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gwaltney v. Commonwealth, 19 Va. App. 468 (1995) (receiving money by virtue of employment supports embezzlement conviction)
- Lee v. Commonwealth, 200 Va. 233 (1958) (emphasizes receiving for another or employer as element of embezzlement)
- Challenor v. Commonwealth, 209 Va. 789 (1969) (cashier diverts payments; demonstrates first-prong sufficiency)
- Davis v. Commonwealth, 39 Va. App. 96 (2002) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in embezzlement cases)
- Evans & Smith v. Commonwealth, 226 Va. 292 (1983) (emphasizes interpretation of embezzlement statutes and evidence standards)
- Wactor v. Commonwealth, 38 Va. App. 375 (2002) (authorization to resolve conflicts in testimonial evidence for embezzlement)