Mark David Murgia v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 0788161

Defendant Mark D. Murgia, a 40-year-old specialty track coach, exchanged private text messages with a 16-year-old female student he coached for several months.
Messages included flirtatious language, terms of endearment, and a crude statement about stretching her legs in the context of coaching.
Defendant sent an explicitly pornographic text describing a sexual "dream"/fantasy involving detailed cunnilingus and intercourse with the minor.
The victim did not report unwanted physical contact, claimed coaching sessions occurred in public with others present, and testified the coach never asked to meet her alone or touched her.
At trial (bench), the court found guilt under Va. Code § 18.2-374.3(D) based on the graphic nature of the messages and the coach–student relationship; the Court of Appeals reversed for insufficient evidence of solicitation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether text messages satisfied the statutory element of "soliciting" a minor with lascivious intent under Va. Code § 18.2-374.3(D)	Messages (particularly the graphic dream) and the coach–student relationship evinced lascivious intent and functioned as an entreaty/proposal to engage in proscribed sexual acts	Messages described sexual conduct but did not entreat, command, persuade, or otherwise attempt to induce the minor to commit any enumerated sexual acts	Reversed — text messages were insufficient to prove solicitation/inducement; they described sexual conduct but did not solicit the minor to commit proscribed acts

Ford v. Commonwealth, 10 Va. App. 224 (statement expressing desire did not constitute solicitation) (Va. Ct. App.)
Huffman v. Commonwealth, 222 Va. 823 (solicitation's gravamen is counselling, enticing, or inducing another to commit a crime) (Va.)
Brooker v. Commonwealth, 41 Va. App. 609 (communications plus steps to meet and explicit enticements can support solicitation) (Va. Ct. App.)
Wiseman v. Commonwealth, 143 Va. 631 (solicitation complete upon the solicitation itself; no overt act required) (Va.)
Bloom v. Commonwealth, 34 Va. App. 364 (actions and arrangements beyond words alone can sustain solicitation conviction) (Va. Ct. App.)