Lillie Kelly Rice Mattox v. Commonwealth ( 1996 )

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Fitzpatrick, Overton and Senior Judge Hodges
Argued at Salem, Virginia
LILLIE KELLY RICE MATTOX
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 1137-95-3 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON
JULY 2, 1996
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY
William N. Alexander, II, Judge
Robert Bryan Haskins (Turner, Haskins &
Whitfield, P.L.C., on brief), for appellant.
Steven A. Witmer, Assistant Attorney General
(James S. Gilmore, III, Attorney General, on
brief), for appellee.
Lillie Kelly Rice Mattox was convicted in a bench trial on
two counts of fraudulently obtaining public assistance in
violation of Code § 63.1-124. On appeal, Mattox contends that
the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions. We
disagree.
"Intent is the purpose formed in a person's mind which may,
and often must, be inferred from the facts and circumstances in a
particular case." Sandoval v. Commonwealth, 20 Va. App. 133,
137, 455 S.E.2d 730, 732 (1995); Ridley v. Commonwealth, 219 Va.
834, 836, 252 S.E.2d 313, 314 (1979). The trial judge, as fact
finder, specifically found the testimony of the Commonwealth's
witness, Ms. Dodd, to be reliable. "The weight which should be
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
given to evidence and whether the testimony of a witness is
credible are questions which the fact finder must decide.
Bridgeman v. Commonwealth, 3 Va. App. 523, 528, 351 S.E.2d 598,
601 (1986).
Upon review of the record, construing the evidence in the
light most favorable to the Commonwealth and granting to it all
reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom, we cannot say
that the ruling below was plainly wrong or unsupported by the
evidence.
Accordingly, the convictions are affirmed.
Affirmed.
- 2 -