Criminal Homicide Law
Judge Charles E.
Moylan, Jr.
Table
of Contents
Dedication.............................................................................................................................. iii
About the Author..................................................................................................................... v
Foreword................................................................................................................................. vii
Preface................................................................................................................................... ix
Table of Contents..................................................................................................................... xi
Introduction.............................................................................................................................. xix
Chapter One
Criminal Homicide: The
Actus Reus
I.
[§ 1.1]
WHAT
IS HOMICIDE?........................................................................ 1
I.
[§ 1.2]
HOMICIDE:
THE “BORN ALIVE” RULE............................................... 1
III.
[§ 1.3]
IS
SUICIDE HOMICIDE?.................................................................... 3
IV.
[§ 1.4]
THE
SITUS OF A HOMICIDE............................................................. 5
V.
[§ 1.5]
HOMICIDE:
ACCELERATING AN IMMINENT DEATH........................ 6
VI.
[§ 1.6]
HOMICIDE:
THE FORMER “YEAR AND A DAY” RULE....................... 6
VII.
[§ 1.7]
HOMICIDE:
PROXIMATE CAUSATION.............................................. 8
VIII.
[§ 1.8]
HOMICIDE:
A CORPUS DELICTI WITHOUT A CORPSE.................... 11
IX.
[§ 1.9]
HOMICIDE
BY OMISSION............................................................... 12
X.
[§ 1.10]
CRIMINAL
HOMICIDE: THE UNIT OF PROSECUTION..................... 14
Chapter Two
A Brief History of
Criminal Homicide
and its Exponential Proliferation
I.
[§ 2.1]
INTRODUCTION............................................................................. 17
II.
[§ 2.2]
THE
VERTICAL PROLIFERATION: LEVELS OF
BLAMEWORTHINESS...................................................................... 17
III.
[§ 2.3]
JUSTIFIABLE
HOMICIDE................................................................. 18
IV.
[§ 2.4]
EXCUSABLE
HOMICIDE.................................................................. 20
V.
[§ 2.5]
BENEFIT
OF CLERGY...................................................................... 22
VI.
[§ 2.6]
MALICE
AFORETHOUGHT AND CHANCE MEDLEY......................... 23
VII.
[§ 2.7]
THE
SEMANTIC SHRIVELING OF “AFORETHOUGHT”..................... 25
VIII.
[§ 2.8]
THE
BIRTH OF MANSLAUGHTER.................................................... 26
IX.
[§ 2.9]
THE
BROAD UMBRELLA OF “MALICE”............................................ 28
X.
[§ 2.10]
THE
FOCUS SHIFTS TO MITIGATION............................................. 29
XI.
[§ 2.11]
GOING
DOWN TO MANSLAUGHTER, NOT UP TO MURDER........... 29
XII.
[§ 2.12]
THE
RECEPTION OF HOMICIDE LAW IN MARYLAND.................... 31
XIII.
[§ 2.13]
MURDER
AND MANSLAUGHTER, ONE CRIME OR TWO?
A TEMPEST IN A TEAPOT............................................................... 31
XIV.
[§ 2.14]
MURDER
SPLITS INTO FIRST AND SECOND DEGREES................. 32
XV.
[§ 2.15]
THE
MULTIPLICATION OF THE MURDEROUS MENS REA.............. 37
XVI.
[§ 2.16]
THE
FULL MATRIX OF KINDS AND GRADES OF
CRIMINAL HOMICIDE..................................................................... 41
Chapter Three
Criminal Homicide Mens Rea
No. 1:
The Specific Intent to Kill
I.
[§ 3.1]
INTENT-TO-KILL
MURDER: SECOND DEGREE............................... 43
A.
[§ 3.2]
Proving
the Intent to Kill.................................................................... 44
II.
[§ 3.3]
INTENT-TO-KILL
MURDER: FIRST DEGREE................................... 45
A.
[§ 3.4]
Searching
for Meaning: Chisley v. State............................................. 46
B.
[§ 3.5]
Chisley’s
Basic Source: Hochheimer.................................................. 47
C.
[§ 3.6]
Hochheimer’s
Source: Pennsylvania and Commonwealth v. Drum....... 48
D.
[§ 3.7]
Did
Maryland Go Astray in Conceptualizing First-Degree Murder?...... 52
E.
[§ 3.8]
Whither
Premeditation in Maryland?.................................................. 53
F.
[§ 3.9]
Premeditation
and Legal Sufficiency: Two Approaches....................... 55
G.
[§ 3.10]
Premeditation:
Optimal Content Versus Minimal Content..................... 58
III.
[§ 3.11]
MITIGATED
INTENT-TO-KILL HOMICIDE: VOLUNTARY
MANSLAUGHTER............................................................................ 62
IV. INCHOATE SPECIFIC-INTENT-TO-KILL HOMICIDES.................................... 63
A.
[§ 3.12]
Generally.......................................................................................... 63
B.
[§ 3.13]
Former
Crime of Assault with Intent to Murder.................................. 63
C.
[§ 3.14]
Attempted
Murder in the First Degree................................................ 66
D.
[§ 3.15]
Attempted
Murder in the Second Degree........................................... 67
E.
[§ 3.16]
Attempted
Voluntary Manslaughter.................................................... 69
V.
[§ 3.17]
THE
SPECIFIC INTENT TO KILL AND VOLUNTARY
INTOXICATION.............................................................................. 70
VI. TRANSFERRED INTENT................................................................................ 79
A.
[§ 3.18]
Generally.......................................................................................... 79
B.
[§ 3.19]
When
the Unintended Victim is Killed................................................ 80
C.
[§ 3.20]
The
Fate of the Intended Victim is Immaterial.................................... 82
D.
[§ 3.21]
When
the Unintended Victim is Neither Killed Nor Injured.................. 86
E.
[§ 3.22]
When
the Unintended Victim is Injured but Not Killed......................... 87
F.
[§ 3.23]
Transferred
Intent in a Nutshell......................................................... 91
G.
[§ 3.24]
“Bad
Aim” Cases Distinguished From “Mistaken Identity” Cases........ 92
VII.
[§ 3.25]
CONCURRENT
INTENT................................................................... 92
Chapter Four
Criminal Homicide Mens Rea
No. 2:
The Specific Intent to Inflict Grievous Bodily Harm
I.
[§ 4.1]
SPECIFIC-INTENT-TO-HARM
MURDER: SECOND DEGREE............. 95
II.
[§ 4.2]
PROOF
BY INFERENCE OF INTENT TO INFLICT
GRIEVOUS HARM............................................................................ 96
III.
[§ 4.3]
SPECIFIC-INTENT-TO-HARM
MURDER: NO INCHOATE FORM....... 97
IV.
[§ 4.4]
TRANSFERRED
INTENT.................................................................. 97
V.
[§ 4.5]
SPECIFIC-INTENT-TO-HARM
MURDER AND VOLUNTARY
INTOXICATION.............................................................................. 98
VI.
[§ 4.6]
SPECIFIC-INTENT-TO-HARM
MURDER: FIRST DEGREE?............... 98
VII.
[§ 4.7]
MITIGATED
SPECIFIC-INTENT-TO-HARM MURDER:
INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER................................................. 103
Chapter Five
Criminal Homicide Mens Rea
No. 3:
The Felony-Murder Doctrine
I.
[§ 5.1]
FELONY-MURDER:
SECOND DEGREE........................................... 105
II.
[§ 5.2]
FELONY-MURDER:
FIRST DEGREE............................................... 114
III.
[§ 5.3]
FELONY
MURDER: SPECIAL CAUSATION PROBLEMS................... 116
IV.
[§ 5.4]
FELONY
MURDER AND VOLUNTARY INTOXICATION................. 120
V.
[§ 5.5]
FELONY
MURDER: NO INCHOATE FORM...................................... 125
VI.
[§ 5.6]
FELONY-MURDER
AND DOUBLE JEOPARDY................................ 126
VII.
[§ 5.7]
JUNIOR
VARSITY FELONY-MURDER:
THE MISDEMEANOR-MANSLAUGHTER DOCTRINE...................... 127
Chapter Six
Criminal Homicide Mens Rea
No. 4:
Depraved-Heart Murder
I.
[§ 6.1]
DEPRAVED-HEART
MURDER: SECOND DEGREE........................... 129
II.
[§ 6.2]
DEPRAVED-HEART
MURDER: FIRST DEGREE?............................. 133
III.
[§ 6.3]
DEPRAVED-HEART
MURDER: SPECIAL
CAUSATION PROBLEMS................................................................ 135
IV.
[§ 6.4]
JUNIOR
VARSITY DEPRAVED-HEART MURDER:
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT MANSLAUGHTER..................................... 137
V.
[§ 6.5]
CONVICTION
FOR INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER OF THE
GROSS NEGLIGENCE VARIETY NOT INCONSISTENT WITH
CONVICTION FOR SECOND-DEGREE MURDER OF THE
DEPRAVED HEART VARIETY......................................................... 139
VI.
[§ 6.6]
DEPRAVED-HEART
MURDER: NO INCHOATE FORM..................... 141
Chapter Seven
Multiple Homicide
Defendants:
Each Mens Rea Floats Free
I.
[§ 7.1]
A
COMMON ACTUS REUS: ONE PARTICIPANT IN A
CRIME MAY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTS OF A
CO-PARTICIPANT......................................................................... 143
II.
[§ 7.2]
EACH
MENS REA FLOATS FREE.................................................... 143
III.
[§ 7.3]
GUILT
LEVEL OF ACCESSORY BEFORE THE FACT
NO LONGER TIED TO THAT OF PRINCIPAL................................. 144
IV.
[§ 7.4]
PARTICIPANTS
IN A SINGLE CRIMINAL HOMICIDE MAY
POSSESS DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GUILT...................................... 145
V.
[§ 7.5]
JOINT
PARTICIPANTS AND TRANSFERRED INTENT................... 147
Chapter Eight
Manslaughter — Generally
I.
[§ 8.1]
MANSLAUGHTER
— GENERALLY................................................. 151
II.
[§ 8.2]
WHAT’S
IN A NAME?.................................................................... 151
III.
[§ 8.3]
SPEAK
NOT OF MALICE BUT OF MITIGATION............................. 153
IV.
[§ 8.4]
THE
ESSENTIAL PLURALISM OF MANSLAUGHTER...................... 154
V.
[§ 8.5]
VOLUNTARY
VERSUS INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER.............. 155
VI.
[§ 8.6]
THE
INCHOATE CRIME OF ATTEMPTED VOLUNTARY
MANSLAUGHTER.......................................................................... 157
VII.
[§ 8.7]
JURY
INSTRUCTION ON CRIMINAL HOMICIDE MAY
FREQUENTLY IGNORE MANSLAUGHTER ENTIRELY.................... 159
VIII.
[§ 8.8]
MANSLAUGHTER:
A RESEARCH GUIDE......................................... 161
Chapter Nine
The Rule of Provocation or
Heat of Passion
I.
[§ 9.1]
APPLICABILITY
OF THIS THEORY OF MITIGATION..................... 163
II.
[§ 9.2]
MITIGATION
IS NOT EXCULPATION............................................ 164
III.
[§ 9.3]
THE
RULE OF PROVOCATION....................................................... 165
A.
[§ 9.4]
The
Killer Must Have Acted in the Heat of Passion.......................... 166
B.
[§ 9.5]
Inconsistent
Defenses Are Permitted............................................... 170
C.
[§ 9.6]
The
Causal Connection Between the Hot Blood and the Killing.......... 170
D.
[§ 9.7]
The
Cooling Period.......................................................................... 172
E.
[§ 9.8]
The
Legal Adequacy of the Provocation........................................... 175
IV.
[§ 9.9]
LEGALLY
ADEQUATE PROVOCATION #1: MUTUAL AFFRAY........ 177
V.
[§ 9.10]
LEGALLY
ADEQUATE PROVOCATION #2:
A SUBSTANTIAL BATTERY........................................................... 179
A.
[§ 9.11]
Provocative
Words Alone Are Never Legally
Adequate Provocation..................................................................... 180
VI.
[§ 9.12]
THE
RECENTLY REPEALED (1997) LEGALLY ADEQUATE
PROVOCATION #3: SPOUSAL ADULTERY..................................... 182
VII.
[§ 9.13]
LEGALLY
ADEQUATE PROVOCATION #4:
UNLAWFUL ARREST..................................................................... 187
VIII.
[§ 9.14]
POSSIBLE
LEGALLY ADEQUATE PROVOCATION #5:
SUBSTANTIAL BATTERY OF CLOSE RELATIVE OR OTHER
THIRD PERSON............................................................................. 189
IX.
[§ 9.15]
THE
RULE OF PROVOCATION IS LIMITED TO
RETALIATORY ATTACKS ON THE ACTUAL PROVOKERS............. 190
X.
[§ 9.16]
THE
RULE OF PROVOCATION IN A NUTSHELL............................. 190
Chapter Ten
The Imperfect Defenses
I.
[§ 10.1]
THE
FIRST RECOGNITION OF IMPERFECT DEFENSES IN
MARYLAND................................................................................... 191
II.
[§ 10.2]
IMPERFECT
DEFENSES OR PARTIAL DEFENSES.......................... 193
III.
[§ 10.3]
DEFENSES
OF SELF, OTHERS, AND HABITATION:
AN OVERVIEW.............................................................................. 194
IV.
[§ 10.4]
IMPERFECT
SELF-DEFENSE.......................................................... 195
V.
[§ 10.5]
IMPERFECT
DEFENSE OF OTHERS............................................... 199
VI.
[§ 10.6]
IMPERFECT
DEFENSE OF HABITATION........................................ 200
VII.
[§ 10.7]
DURESS......................................................................................... 201
VIII.
[§ 10.8]
NECESSITY................................................................................... 202
Chapter Eleven
Unlawful Act-Manslaughter
I.
[§ 11.1]
PROPER
TERMINOLOGY: THE COMMON LAW
“UNLAWFUL ACT-MANSLAUGHTER” DOCTRINE......................... 207
II.
[§ 11.2]
LESSER
CULPABILITY VERSUS THE AFFIRMATIVE
MITIGATION OF PRESUMPTIVELY GREATER CULPABILITY........ 209
III.
[§ 11.3]
THE
RECOGNITION OF UNLAWFUL ACT-
MANSLAUGHTER IN MARYLAND.................................................. 210
IV.
[§ 11.4]
MARYLAND’S
SUBSEQUENT REPEATED RECOGNITION OF
UNLAWFUL ACT-MANSLAUGHTER............................................... 212
V.
[§ 11.5]
MUST
THE UNLAWFUL ACT BE MALUM IN SE?............................ 213
VI.
[§ 11.6]
THE
UNLAWFUL ACT NEED NOT BE LIFE-ENDANGERING........... 216
VII.
[§ 11.7]
HOMICIDE
RESULTING FROM THE ATTEMPTED
PERPETRATION OF AN UNLAWFUL ACT...................................... 221
VIII.
[§ 11.8]
A
NISI PRIUS EXAMPLE OF UNLAWFUL ACT-
MANSLAUGHTER.......................................................................... 221
Chapter Twelve
Gross Negligence
Manslaughter
I.
[§ 12.1]
GROSS
NEGLIGENCE MANSLAUGHTER — GENERALLY.............. 223
II.
[§ 12.2]
LESSER
CULPABILITY VERSUS THE AFFIRMATIVE
MITIGATION OF PRESUMPTIVELY GREATER CULPABILITY........ 223
III.
[§ 12.3]
GROSS
NEGLIGENCE MANSLAUGHTER’S POSITION
ON THE LADDER OF ESCALATING BLAMEWORTHINESS............. 225
IV.
[§ 12.4]
THE
RECOGNITION OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE
MANSLAUGHTER IN MARYLAND AND THE FAILURE TO
ANTICIPATE DEPRAVED-HEART MURDER................................... 226
V.
[§ 12.5]
THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GROSS NEGLIGENCE
MANSLAUGHTER AND DEPRAVED-HEART MURDER.................... 228
VI.
[§ 12.6]
GROSS
NEGLIGENCE MANSLAUGHTER AND
DEPRAVED-HEART MURDER ARE NOT MUTUALLY
EXCLUSIVE BUT ARE IN A GREATER INCLUSIVE-LESSER
INCLUDED RELATIONSHIP........................................................... 230
VII.
[§ 12.7]
THE
SEMANTIC FALLACY OF THE FALSE AFFIRMATIVE:
THE LACK OF MALICE IS NOT AN
ELEMENT OF MANSLAUGHTER.................................................... 232
VIII.
[§ 12.8]
THE
BURDEN OF PRODUCTION FOR GROSS
NEGLIGENCE MANSLAUGHTER.................................................... 233
IX.
[§ 12.9]
GROSS
NEGLIGENCE MAY CONSIST OF ACTS OF
OMISSION..................................................................................... 235
X.
[§ 12.10]
INTOXICATION
AND MANSLAUGHTER: GROSS
NEGLIGENCE MANSLAUGHTER IS NOT A
SPECIFIC INTENT CRIME............................................................. 237
XI.
[§ 12.11]
“A
ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME . . . .”:
COMMON LAW GROSS NEGLIGENCE MANSLAUGHTER AND
STATUTORY MANSLAUGHTER BY AUTOMOBILE......................... 240
XII.
[§ 12.12]
STATUTORY
MANSLAUGHTER BY AUTOMOBILE
PREEMPTS THE FIELD.................................................................. 242
XIII.
[§ 12.13]
THE
HEAVY BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING A PRIMA FACIE
CASE OF GROSS NEGLIGENCE..................................................... 243
XIV.
[§ 12.14]
OTHER
SOURCES OF PRECEDENTIAL GUIDANCE ON
GROSS NEGLIGENCE: THE GUEST STATUTE CASES.................... 247
XV.
[§ 12.15]
OTHER
SOURCES OF PRECEDENTIAL GUIDANCE ON
GROSS NEGLIGENCE: THE PUNITIVE DAMAGES CASES.............. 248
XVI.
[§ 12.16]
OTHER
SOURCES OF PRECEDENTIAL GUIDANCE ON
GROSS NEGLIGENCE: STATUTORY IMMUNITY CASES................ 251
XVII.
[§ 12.17]
OTHER
SOURCES OF PRECEDENTIAL GUIDANCE ON
GROSS NEGLIGENCE: EXCULPATORY CONTRACT CLAUSES....... 254
XVIII.
[§ 12.18]
CONTRIBUTORY
NEGLIGENCE DOES NOT COUNT —
OR DOES IT?................................................................................. 255
XIX.
[§ 12.19]
THE
UNIT OF PROSECUTION IN GROSS NEGLIGENCE
MANSLAUGHTER CASES............................................................... 257
XX.
[§ 12.20]
THE
SPECIAL CASE OF THE POLICE OFFICER WHO
KILLS A SUSPECT AND OTHER SPECIAL CASES........................... 257
Table of Authorities.................................................................................................................. 267
Table of Cases......................................................................................................................... 269
Index....................................................................................................................................... 285