Maldonado-Mejia v. Commonwealth, 752 S.E.2d 833

In May 2011 Maldonado-Mejia entered an Alford plea to felony child neglect; the circuit court accepted the plea but deferred a finding of guilt and placed her on active supervised probation under a "Disposition Continuance Order" that would dismiss the charge on successful completion of conditions.
The order explicitly withheld a formal adjudication of guilt and imposed conditions including keeping the peace and supervised probation; failure would result in a felony conviction and sentence per the plea terms.
In July 2011 she completed ATF Form 4473 to purchase a firearm and answered “No” to questions asking whether she was under indictment or had a felony conviction.
State police learned she had been indicted for child neglect and she was later indicted and convicted under Va. Code § 18.2-308.2:2(K) for willfully and intentionally making a materially false statement on the ATF form.
Because that conviction violated the probation conditions, the circuit court revoked the deferred disposition, found her guilty of the original child neglect charge, and sentenced her; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
The Supreme Court of Virginia reviewed (1) whether she was "under indictment" when she completed the ATF form, (2) whether she acted willfully and intentionally in making a false statement, and (3) whether revocation of the deferred disposition was proper.

Issue	Maldonado-Mejia's Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
Was she "under indictment" when she completed the ATF form?	Her indictment was extinguished when the court accepted her plea and deferred disposition; thus she was not "under indictment."	The indictment remained in effect until acquittal or conviction; the deferred finding did not extinguish the indictment.	Court: She remained under indictment because Virginia law permits amendment until conviction or acquittal and the court expressly deferred a finding of guilt.
Did she "willfully and intentionally" make a materially false statement on ATF Form 4473?	She lacked criminal intent or actual knowledge that her statement was false when she signed the form.	Her arraignment and plea colloquy put her on notice of the charge; evidence supports that she knew she was under indictment.	Court: Sufficient evidence supported the trial court’s finding that she knew she was under indictment and thus willfully and intentionally lied.
Was revocation of the deferred disposition (conviction for child neglect) proper?	Revocation was improper because the false-statement conviction was unsupported.	Conviction under § 18.2-308.2:2(K) breached the probation/deferred-disposition conditions, warranting revocation.	Court: Because the false-statement conviction was affirmed, revocation and conviction on the original child neglect charge were proper.

Smith v. Commonwealth, 282 Va. 449 (Virginia Supreme Court) (defines "willfully and intentionally" for § 18.2-308.2:2(K) and requires actual knowledge of falsity)
Clark v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 636 (Virginia Supreme Court) (standard for affirming trial court when evidence supports findings)
Bryan v. United States, 524 U.S. 184 (U.S. Supreme Court) (observations on construction of the term "willfully")
United States v. Hill, 210 F.3d 881 (8th Cir. 2000) (discussion that indictments give notice to defendants; cited for contrast to Virginia law)