Attempted Homicide Prosecutions
⚖️ Overview of Attempted Homicide Under U.S. Law
Definition:
Attempted homicide occurs when a person, with the intent to kill another, takes a substantial step toward causing death, but the victim survives. It falls under state criminal statutes, often classified as attempted first-degree murder or attempted second-degree murder, depending on premeditation and intent.
Legal Elements:
Intent to Kill – The defendant must have had a clear and specific intent to cause death.
Substantial Step – There must be an act that goes beyond preparation (e.g., shooting at the victim, stabbing, poisoning).
Failure or Prevention – The victim did not die due to intervention or chance.
Common Federal & State Statutes Used:
18 U.S.C. § 1113 – Attempt to commit murder or manslaughter within federal jurisdiction.
State Penal Codes (e.g., California Penal Code § 664/187, New York Penal Law § 110/125).
Punishment:
Attempted homicide is typically punished with life imprisonment or long-term incarceration (15–40 years), depending on severity, intent, and victim injury.
🔹 1. People v. Staples (California, 1970)
Facts: Staples fired a handgun at a police officer during a traffic stop but missed. He fled the scene and was later apprehended.
Legal Issue: Whether firing at a police officer constituted sufficient evidence of intent to kill.
Prosecution: Used eyewitness testimony and ballistic evidence to prove deliberate aim and intent.
Defense: Claimed he fired only to scare, not kill.
Outcome: The California Supreme Court held that intent to kill could be inferred from the act of firing a deadly weapon directly at a person. Staples was convicted of attempted first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Significance: Established that intent to kill may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon aimed at a vital part of the body.
🔹 2. People v. Bland (California, 2002)
Facts: Bland fired into a car, killing one person and injuring two others. Prosecutors charged him with attempted murder of the survivors.
Legal Issue: Whether “transferred intent” applied to attempted murder for the unintended victims.
Prosecution: Argued Bland intended to kill all occupants, not just the deceased victim.
Defense: Claimed only one intended target.
Outcome: The California Supreme Court ruled that attempted murder requires a specific intent to kill each individual victim, rejecting transferred intent but recognizing “concurrent intent” where one acts with conscious disregard for multiple lives.
Significance: Clarified that in attempted homicide, prosecutors must prove specific intent toward each victim.
🔹 3. United States v. Kwong (2nd Cir. 1994)
Facts: Kwong mailed a bomb to his former supervisor that exploded and injured the target.
Legal Issue: Whether mailing an explosive with intent to kill constitutes attempted murder under federal law.
Prosecution: Proved deliberate planning, construction of a bomb, and mailing addressed to the victim.
Defense: Claimed intent was to scare, not kill.
Outcome: The court held that the deliberate use of a lethal device demonstrated clear intent to kill. Kwong was convicted of attempted murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1113 and use of explosives; sentenced to 45 years in federal prison.
Significance: Set precedent that indirect lethal acts (e.g., mailing bombs) meet the “substantial step” requirement for attempted homicide.
🔹 4. State v. Oats (Florida, 2003)
Facts: Oats shot two police officers during a traffic stop; both survived.
Legal Issue: Whether intent to kill can be inferred despite nonfatal injuries.
Prosecution: Used ballistic analysis and medical testimony to show Oats aimed for vital organs.
Defense: Claimed intoxication negated intent.
Outcome: The Florida Supreme Court affirmed conviction for attempted first-degree murder, ruling voluntary intoxication did not excuse intent. Sentence: Two consecutive life terms.
Significance: Clarified that voluntary intoxication is not a defense to specific intent crimes when clear physical evidence indicates intent to kill.
🔹 5. People v. Coleman (Illinois, 2012)
Facts: Coleman ambushed his ex-girlfriend, shooting her multiple times in the torso; she survived.
Legal Issue: Whether prior threats and ambush evidence established premeditated intent.
Prosecution: Presented text messages, recorded threats, and the fact that Coleman waited for the victim with a loaded gun.
Defense: Claimed temporary emotional distress.
Outcome: Convicted of attempted first-degree murder and sentenced to 35 years imprisonment.
Significance: Affirmed that premeditation can form within seconds, and cooling-off time is not required to prove intent.
🔹 6. United States v. Hinton (D.C. Circuit, 2017)
Facts: Hinton shot a rival gang member multiple times but missed fatal areas; the victim survived.
Legal Issue: Whether shooting at close range constitutes attempted murder or aggravated assault.
Prosecution: Argued Hinton deliberately aimed to kill.
Defense: Claimed he fired in self-defense.
Outcome: Convicted of attempted second-degree murder and use of a firearm during a violent crime; sentenced to 30 years.
Significance: Distinguished between reckless shooting (assault) and intentional targeted shooting (attempted murder).
⚖️ Legal Principles Derived from These Cases
| Principle | Illustrated In Case | Key Holding |
|---|---|---|
| Intent can be inferred from deadly acts | People v. Staples | Shooting at someone directly shows intent to kill. |
| Each victim requires specific intent | People v. Bland | No transferred intent in attempted murder. |
| Indirect methods still count | U.S. v. Kwong | Mailing lethal devices qualifies as substantial step. |
| Intoxication not a defense | State v. Oats | Intent proven despite intoxication. |
| Premeditation can be quick | People v. Coleman | Seconds of reflection suffice for first-degree attempt. |
| Targeted shooting ≠ reckless act | U.S. v. Hinton | Distinction between assault and attempted murder clarified. |
🔍 Summary of Sentences
Typical Range: 20 years to life imprisonment.
Aggravating Factors: Use of firearm, targeting police or public officials, prior record, premeditation.
Mitigating Factors: Youth, lack of criminal history, provocation.
✅ Conclusion
Attempted homicide prosecutions in the U.S. revolve around proving specific intent and substantial step. Courts consistently rule that firing, stabbing, poisoning, or bomb-making actions clearly demonstrate intent to kill, even if the victim survives. Punishments are often comparable to actual murder sentences due to the violent nature of the act and public safety considerations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments