Terry Lee Poff, s/k/a Terry Lee Poff, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 0911151

Appellant Terry Lee Poff was convicted by a jury of forcible sodomy (Code § 18.2-67.1) and taking indecent liberties with a minor in a supervisory role (Code § 18.2-370.1); acquitted of rape and abduction charges.
Victim K.A., then 15, testified that Poff exposed his penis, demanded oral sex, and then had vaginal intercourse; she sought help and a SANE exam; police collected DNA from Poff the same day.
Forensic testing showed a foreign DNA profile on Poff’s pubic swabs and inner fly of his underpants that the analyst said could not eliminate K.A. as the contributor (statistical match strongly favoring K.A.).
On cross-examination, defense questioned K.A. about an alleged prior false accusation she had made to her friend A.H. K.A. denied making a later-disclaimed “three-men rape” story.
Defense proffered A.H. to testify that K.A. had told her a fabricated “three-men” rape and later said she was joking; the trial court excluded A.H.’s testimony as inadmissible extrinsic impeachment and under the rape-shield guidance, and the jury convicted on the two counts noted above.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of third‑party testimony about a prior false accusation	Commonwealth: exclusion proper under rape‑shield principles; defense failed to seek rape‑shield hearing	Poff: A.H.’s testimony is admissible extrinsic impeachment to attack K.A.’s credibility and is not “sexual conduct” under the rape‑shield statute	Trial court abused discretion in excluding A.H.; prior false statement not barred by Code § 18.2‑67.7 and jury should decide credibility
Constitutional harmless‑error effect on convictions	Commonwealth: exclusion harmless given DNA and other evidence	Poff: exclusion of impeachment evidence infringed Sixth Amendment confrontation/cross‑examination rights and could have affected verdicts	Reversed forcible sodomy conviction (error not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt); affirmed indecent‑liberties conviction (error harmless beyond reasonable doubt given overwhelming corroborating evidence)

Clinebell v. Commonwealth, 235 Va. 319 (1988) (prior false statements are not "conduct" under the rape‑shield statute and may be used for impeachment in sex cases)
Roadcap v. Commonwealth, 50 Va. App. 732 (2007) (defendant must proffer evidence creating reasonable probability that a victim’s prior abuse claims were false before extrinsic proof admitted)
Richardson v. Commonwealth, 42 Va. App. 236 (2004) (limits on admitting prior‑accusation evidence when the impeachment witness is self‑interested)
Clifford v. Commonwealth, 48 Va. App. 499 (2006) (cross‑examination as a constitutional right in sexual‑offense prosecutions)
Pitt v. Commonwealth, 260 Va. 692 (2000) (federal constitutional errors require reversal unless harmless beyond a reasonable doubt)
Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673 (1986) (improper denial of impeachment tested under Chapman harmless‑error standard)