Hargrave v. Com.
| Decision Date | 14 January 1974 |
| Citation | 214 Va. 436,201 S.E.2d 597 |
| Parties | Jerry HARGRAVE, etc. v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
Russell L. Watson, Colonial Heights, Jr., for plaintiff in error.
Gilbert W. Haith, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Andrew P. Miller, Atty. Gen., on brief) for defendant in error.
Before SNEAD, C.J., and I'ANSON, CARRICO, HARRISON, COCHRAN, HARMAN and POFF, JJ.
Jerry Hargrave (Hargrave or defendant), who waived a trial by jury, was convicted of attempted murder by the trial court which fixed his punishment at a term of four years in the penitentiary.
The sole question here is whether the evidence established the specific intent to commit murder which is an essential element of attempted murder.
The evidence discloses that both Hargrave and Shirley Mae Gill (Gill), who had been defendant's common law wife for four years, had been drinking prior to the occurrence giving rise to the criminal charge. They engaged in an argument because Hargrave was 'going with' Gill's sister. Hargrave announced that he intended to terminate his relationship with Gill and 'move out the house.' He demanded his coat which was in Gill's possession. Gill declined to surrender the coat to defendant who then left the premises.
Hargrave returned to the room a few minutes later carrying a single shot twenty-two calibre rifle in his hands. When he was about ten feet from Gill, who was seated in a chair, defendant told Gill 'to give him his coat' and fired toward her without raising the rifle to his shoulder.
The projectile grazed Gill on the right shoulder causing a 'little burn' before it struck a washing machine approximately three feet behind her. Gill immediately fled the scene and went to the police station.
To prove the crime of attempted murder two essential elements must be established. The specific intent to kill the victim must be shown and this must be coupled with evidence of some overt but ineffectual act in furtherance of this purpose. The use of a deadly weapon, standing alone, is not sufficient to prove the specific intent required to establish attempted murder. Thacker v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 767, 114 S.E. 504 (1922).
The necessary intent constituting one element in an attempt to commit murder is the intent in fact, as distinguished from an intent in law. Merritt v. Commonwealth, 164 Va. 653, 662, 180 S.E. 395, 399 (1935).
Intent in fact is the purpose formed in a person's mind and may be, and frequently is, shown by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holloway v. Commonwealth of Va..
...conduct and statements. Long v. Commonwealth, 8 Va.App. 194, 198, 379 S.E.2d 473, 476 (1989) (citing Hargrave v. Commonwealth, 214 Va. 436, 437, 201 S.E.2d 597, 598 (1974)). A trier of fact may also consider how the drugs were packaged. Dukes, 227 Va. at 122–23, 313 S.E.2d at 383–84; Monroe......
-
Holloway v. Commonwealth Of Va., Record No. 0828-08-1.
...conduct and statements. Long v. Commonwealth, 8 Va.App. 194, 198, 379 S.E.2d 473, 476 (1989) (citing Hargrave v. Commonwealth, 214 Va. 436, 437, 201 S.E.2d 597, 598 (1974)). A trier of fact may also consider how the drugs were packaged. Monroe, 4 Va.App. at 156, 355 S.E.2d at 337; Dukes, 22......
-
Secret v. Commonwealth
...murder, the evidence must show ‘specific intent to kill the victim,’ " along with an overt act. Id. (quoting Hargrave v. Commonwealth , 214 Va. 436, 437, 201 S.E.2d 597 (1974) ); see id . at 78, 758 S.E.2d 225 ("An attempt [is] any overt act done with the intent to commit the crime, and whi......
-
Burns v. Com.
...broke into and entered Cooley's home. Intent is frequently shown by circumstances or by a person's conduct. Hargrave v. Commonwealth, 214 Va. 436, 437, 201 S.E.2d 597, 598 (1974). Thus, we find sufficient evidence to support all the convictions in this C. PENALTY PHASE ISSUES 1. REBUTTAL EV......