COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Coleman, Annunziata and Bumgardner 

Argued at Salem, Virginia 

ROBERT TATE WESCOAT 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 1256-98-2 JUDGE SAM W. COLEMAN III 

 FEBRUARY 15, 2000 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY 

Paul M. Peatross, Jr., Judge 

 Scott Goodman for appellant. 

 Kathleen B. Martin, Assistant Attorney 

General (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General; 

Thomas D. Bagwell, Senior Assistant Attorney 

General, on brief), for appellee. 

 

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code 

§ 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.

 Robert Tate Wescoat was convicted in a jury trial of 

distribution of marijuana to a juvenile in violation of Code 

§ 18.2-255 and attempted distribution of marijuana to a juvenile 

at least three years his junior in violation of Code § 18.2-26. 

On appeal, Wescoat argues that the evidence was insufficient to 

support his conviction for attempted distribution of marijuana. 

We disagree and affirm the conviction. 

BACKGROUND

 Viewed in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the 

evidence established that on April 5, 1997, Wescoat gave 
- 2 - 

approximately two ounces of marijuana to Ben Holt to sell. Holt 

was seventeen years old at the time and had sold marijuana for 

Wescoat during the preceding months. After being arrested trying 

to sell the drugs at Albemarle High School, where he was a 

student, Holt agreed to assist authorities in conducting a 

controlled buy from Wescoat. 

 Holt participated in two tape-recorded telephone calls with 

Wescoat where, according to Holt, Wescoat agreed to give Holt more 

marijuana to sell. Holt asked Wescoat how much marijuana Wescoat 

could obtain. Holt stated that he would need a "half" or a "QP." 

Wescoat informed Holt that a "QP" would cost $450. Holt and 

Wescoat agreed to meet on April 21, 1997. Just prior to the 

meeting, Wescoat informed Holt that he would bring a "half" to the 

meeting, the amount Wescoat had with him at the time, and that he 

would "go into town and pick up some more and give it to [Holt]." 

 That evening Wescoat and Holt met at the Forest Lakes Food 

Lion. During the meeting, Holt gave Wescoat money that he owed 

Wescoat for the two ounces of marijuana that Holt had previously 

purchased. The recording of the meeting proved that Wescoat was 

mistaken about the amount of marijuana that Holt had wanted to 

purchase. Wescoat informed Holt that he would sell him whatever 

he needed. 

 Wescoat was arrested in the parking lot and was searched. 

The officers found a small amount of marijuana (4.7 grams) on 
- 3 - 

Wescoat. In Wescoat's vehicle, the officers found the marked 

money Holt had given to Wescoat for the two ounces of marijuana 

Wescoat previously sold Holt. 

 Jefferson Area Drug Enforcement Task Force Sergeant Michael 

Dean was qualified as an expert in the vernacular of the drug 

trade and he testified that "QP" means a quarter pound of 

marijuana and that a "half" means a half pound of marijuana. 

 Wescoat testified that he had never sold drugs to Holt. 

Wescoat admitted that he was one of the people involved in the 

taped telephone conversations, but he stated that his comments 

concerning his ability to obtain marijuana was merely bragging. 

Wescoat testified that the marijuana found on him during the 

search was for his personal use. 

ANALYSIS

 Wescoat argues that although the tape recording of the 

meeting indicates that he would supply additional marijuana to 

Holt, no direct act was committed by Wescoat toward consummation 

of the sale of marijuana. He argues that, even assuming a large 

amount of drugs existed elsewhere that he intended to obtain for 

Holt, no evidence existed that he committed an act toward 

obtaining the drugs. 

 On review of a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, 

we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the 

Commonwealth and grant to it all reasonable inferences fairly 
- 4 - 

deducible therefrom. See Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 255 Va. 516, 

521, 499 S.E.2d 263, 265 (1998). "The credibility of the 

witnesses and the weight accorded the evidence are matters solely 

for the fact finder who has the opportunity to see and hear that 

evidence as it is presented." Sandoval v. Commonwealth, 20 Va. 

App. 133, 138, 455 S.E.2d 730, 732 (1995) (citations omitted). 

 "'An attempt to commit a crime is composed of two 

elements: (1) The intent to commit it; and (2) a direct, 

ineffectual act done towards its commission.'" Haywood v. 

Commonwealth, 20 Va. App. 562, 565, 458 S.E.2d 606, 607-08 (1995) 

(citation omitted). A direct, ineffectual act, done toward 

commission of an offense need not be the last proximate act toward 

completion of the offense, but "it must go beyond mere preparation 

and be done to produce the intended result." Tharrington v. 

Commonwealth, 2 Va. App. 491, 494, 346 S.E.2d 337, 339 (1986). In 

distinguishing acts of mere preparation from acts that constitute 

an attempt, "'it may be said that preparation consists [of] . . . 

arranging the means or measures necessary for the commission of 

the offense and that the attempt is the direct movement toward the 

commission after the preparations are made.'" Granberry v. 

Commonwealth, 184 Va. 674, 678, 36 S.E.2d 547, 548 (1946) (quoting 

14 Am. Jur. Criminal Law § 67 (1938)). Moreover, where intent has 

been shown, any slight act done in furtherance of this intent will 
- 5 - 

constitute an attempt. See Tharrington, 2 Va. App. at 494, 346 

S.E.2d at 340. 

 Here, the evidence proves that Wescoat intended and 

attempted to distribute marijuana to Holt for further 

distribution. Wescoat and Holt discussed on three separate 

occasions when and how much marijuana Wescoat could obtain. 

Wescoat and Holt met at the prearranged location for the 

transfer of marijuana. Wescoat had marijuana with him. At the 

meeting, it became apparent that Wescoat did not have the 

quantity of drugs with him that Holt wanted to purchase. 

Wescoat had mistakenly thought that Holt wanted a half ounce, 

which Wescoat stated he was prepared to sell Holt at the time. 

However, Wescoat agreed to obtain a substantial amount of 

marijuana for Holt and instructed Holt to call him later that 

evening. Wescoat was arrested before he left the parking lot. 

 The evidence proves that not only did Wescoat and Holt 

negotiate a sale and prearrange a meeting to consummate the 

sale, Wescoat met Holt and intended and attempted to sell the 

amount of marijuana that he had with him. Except for the 

misunderstanding that Wescoat had regarding the amount of drugs 

that Holt wanted to purchase, the sale would have been 

consummated. Going to the parking lot with marijuana that he 

intended to sell to Holt as per their prior agreement 
- 6 - 

constituted an attempt by Wescoat to sell marijuana to a 

juvenile. 

 We, therefore, find the evidence sufficient and affirm the 

conviction. 

Affirmed.