William Lloyd Henry v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 753 S.E.2d 868

William Lloyd Henry submitted two sworn financial statements (May 6, 2011 and Jan. 6, 2012) to a court clerk seeking court‑appointed counsel; both forms listed no real estate and minimal assets.
The clerk filled out the forms based on Henry’s oral answers and Henry signed both under oath; one form listed $20 cash and $500/month rental income on another line.
Henry had been gifted a parcel of real estate in 1992 and county records showed no transfer out of his name before June 26, 2012.
Henry was convicted after a bench trial of two counts of forgery of a public record, two counts of uttering a forged public record (Code § 18.2‑168), and two counts of perjury (Code § 19.2‑161).
On appeal the Court of Appeals of Virginia reversed the forgery and uttering convictions but affirmed the misdemeanor perjury convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Henry’s false statements on indigency forms constituted forgery/uttering under Code § 18.2‑168	Commonwealth: injecting false information into a public record is forgery; Henry’s lies entered the public record and could be acted upon	Henry: falsity was in the facts recorded, not in the document’s genuineness; the forms remained what they purported to be	Reversed — falsity was fact‑based, not a false making of the documents; no forgery or uttering when document’s authenticity/genuineness is not altered
Whether real estate must be "readily convertible into cash" under Code § 19.2‑159 for a perjury conviction based on an indigency statement	Henry: Commonwealth failed to prove real estate was readily convertible to cash; Smith requires such proof	Commonwealth: § 19.2‑159 treats real estate differently — it must be considered in terms of amounts obtainable by loan, not immediate convertibility	Affirmed — statute does not require real estate to be readily convertible to cash; evidence showed Henry owned real estate, so perjury convictions stand

Rodriquez v. Commonwealth, 50 Va. App. 667 (Va. Ct. App.) (forgery upheld where false information transformed summonses into documents that were not what they purported to be)
Brown v. Commonwealth, 56 Va. App. 178 (Va. Ct. App.) (no forgery where documents remained what they purported to be despite false underlying facts)
Gilbert v. United States, 370 U.S. 650 (U.S. 1962) (falsity in representation of facts, not in genuineness of execution, is not forgery)
Vizcarra‑Ayala v. Mukasey, 541 F.3d 870 (9th Cir.) (false factual statements in instruments signed by the declarant are not necessarily forgery)
United States v. Jones, 553 F.2d 351 (4th Cir.) (false statements in otherwise valid instruments generally not treated as forgery)
Smith v. Commonwealth, 12 Va. App. 606 (Va. Ct. App.) (perjury reversal where personal property was not readily convertible to cash at time of statement)