State v. Mitchell
| Decision Date | 10 December 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 37329,37329 |
| Citation | 397 P.2d 417,65 Wn.2d 373 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | The STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Vernon MITCHELL, Appellant. |
Kadish & Kane, Seattle, for appellant.
Charles O. Carroll, Pros. Atty., William L. Kinzel, Deputy Pros. Atty., Seattle, for respondent.
At about 3 a.m., on March 16, 1963, in the Birdland dance club in Seattle, Washington, Marilyn Van Ausdell was wounded in the abdomen with a small caliber pistol. Her former boy friend, defendant Vernon Mitchell, was accused of the shooting. He was charged, tried, and convicted of the crime of assault in the first degree. He appeals.
The sole issue raised upon the appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction. In this respect, defendant contends the proof fails to establish the essential element of an intent to kill, because (a) there is no evidence, apart from the act of shooting, from which the jury could infer the intent to kill, and (b) the evidence demonstrates that defendant was, at the time of the shooting, too intoxicated to form the requisite intent.
We have carefully reviewed the statements of facts and must disagree with defendant.
The specific intent to kill in first degree assault cases is to be gathered from all of the circumstances of the case, of which the infliction of the wound is but one. State v. Davis, 72 Wash. 261, 130 P. 95 (1913). In the instant case, the evidence indicates, together with other circumstances, that the defendant and the complaining witness had, shortly before the incident at Birdland, terminated a meretricious relationship following which the defendant had threatened the life of the complaining witness. This evidence, coupled with the manner and act of the shooting, sustains the jury's finding of intent.
@ The evidence further indicates that, although defendant had consumed a substantial amount of alcohol, he was able to move about and around the various areas of the dance club and to aim and fire the weapon involved. The question of the degree and effect of his intoxication upon the formation of an intent to kill clearly became an issue for the jury under the provisions of RCW 9.01.114. State v. Jensen, 194 Wash. 515, 78 P.2d 600 (1938).
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Tyler
...it. State v. Shelton, 71 Wash.2d 838, 431 P.2d 201 (1967); State v. Willis, 67 Wash.2d 681, 409 P.2d 669 (1966); State v. Mitchell, 65 Wash.2d 373, 397 P.2d 417 (1964). In its instruction, the court properly reduced each count to its component elements and told the jury that each element ha......
-
State v. Woo Won Choi
...and act of inflicting the wound, but also the nature of the prior relationship and any previous threats. See State v. Mitchell, 65 Wash.2d 373, 374, 397 P.2d 417 (1964). A person acts with knowledge when he is aware of or has information which would reasonably lead him to be aware of facts ......
-
State v. Halls
...the manner and act of inflicting the wound, the nature of the prior relationship, and any previous threats. State v. Mitchell, 65 Wn.2d 373, 374, 397 P.2d 417 (1964). The record shows Ms. Harshman and Mr. Halls were arguing. Mr. Halls grabbed her by the throat and then threw her on the bed.......
-
State v. Cloud
...shot at the occupied area of the truck, striking the driver side door. Accordingly, Ferreira is inapplicable. Cloud also relies on State v. Mitchell, [5] and State v. Choi.[6] However, Mitchell and Choi have been rejected by State v. Anderson. 72 Wn.App. 453, 458-59, 864 P.2d 1001 (1994). I......