Criminal Law

Brief

Smallwood v. State

Procedural History:

• Convicted in a non-jury trial of three counts of assault with intent to murder his rape victims.
• Appealed.
• Reversed.

Facts:

• Defendant had HIV and was aware of his status.
• He was warned by a social worker that he should practice “Safe Sex”.
• Defendant raped his victims without the use of a condom.

Issue:

• Did the defendant have an intent to kill?

Holding:

• No. Reversed.

Reasoning:

• The required intent in the crime of assault with intent to murder and attempted murder is the specific intent to murder, i.e., the specific intent to kill under circumstances that would not legally justify or excuse the killing or mitigate it to manslaughter.
• The court must prove that Smallwood possess a specific intent to kill at the time he assaulted each of the three women.
• An intent to kill may be proved by circumstantial evidence.
• The state however has presented no evidence from which it can be reasonably be concluded that death by AIDS is a probable result of Smallwood’s actions to the same extent that death is the probable result of firing a deadly weapon at a vital part of someone’s body.
• The court is unable to find sufficient evidence to infer an intent to kill.