Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

PEOPLE v. JOHNSON

ELLIOTT, J.

As in a cops and robbers movie, a police car is hailed to follow robbers fleeing the wrong way on a one-way street. When the police car stalls, officers run after the robber's car. That vehicle collides with a parked car and bounces into a taxicab before defendant leans out a car window and fires a sawed-off shotgun at a uniformed policeman chasing him. Defendant is finally caught on a freeway with the gun and charged with assault with intent to commit murder, MCLA 750.83; MSA 28.278.

The intentional discharge of a firearm at someone within range is an assault. The usual result and purpose of such an assault is death. The unjustified and unexcused intention to kill when committing an assault constitutes the crime charged.

There would rarely be a conviction if a criminal's intent had to be confessed or proven directly by a witness. Intent, like any other fact, may be proven indirectly by inference from the conduct of the accused and surrounding circumstances from which it logically and reasonably follows.

From the evidence adduced at trial, the jury could have properly inferred the existence of intent to commit murder. Rather, the jury found the included offense, assault with intent to do great bodily harm; and defendant received a moderate three-to-ten year sentence. The instruction permitting inference of intent was not error. No other error is claimed.

Affirmed.

All concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. JOHNSON
(Jul 22, 1974)