{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

CB Harrod v. State - Cheryl’s and Christopher’s life...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
John v. State 499A.2d 959 (Md. App. 1985) Fact: Procedural Facts: Convicted at Trial court in Maryland. Appellate court. Operative Facts: Hard was charged w/ two counts of assault and two counts of carrying a deadly weapon openly with intent to injure. Assault encompasses two definitions: 1) An attempt to commit a battery 2) An unlawful intentional act which places another in reasonable apprehension of receiving an immediate battery John, the appellant, was awaken when he heard a deep voice (Calvin) entering his home to greet his wife (Cheryl). He got a hammer and brought it down, threatened Calvin to get out or he’ll get hurt. Then when he didn’t, John started to swing the hammer around towards Calvin and hit the wall above of Christopher (John’s baby). John then went and got a 4 inch knife and threatened
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Cheryl’s and Christopher’s life, then chased after Calvin. 2 counts of carrying a deadly weapon (hammer and knife), 1 count battery against Cheryl, one count battery against Christopher. Issue: Broad Question: Narrow Question: Was Christopher’s count of assault count? Holding: No Rule: An attempt to commit any crime requires a specific intent to commit that crime Rational: Nowhere does the records indicate that appellant threw the hammer with the specific intent to injure Christopher. Also, insufficient evidence that appellant, by an unlawful intentional act, placed Christopher in reasonable apprehension of receiving an immediate battery. Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online