Opinion ID: 2161601
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 47

Heading: Denial of Motion for Judgment of Acquittal as to the Murder of Susan Kennedy

Text: The gist of Grandison's argument here is that as to the murder of Susan Kennedy his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. This is so, he contends, because the State maintained that Kennedy was murdered by mistake and for him to have been legally convicted of that murder the State would have been required to prove he initiated, arranged, coordinated, commanded or contracted Kennedy's murder. In our view the doctrine of transferred intent, recognized in Maryland, is as applicable here as it was in Gladden v. State, 273 Md. 383, 330 A.2d 176 (1974). In Gladden, Judge O'Donnell said for the Court: Put another way, `if one intends injury to the person of another under circumstances in which such a mental element constitutes mens rea, and in the effort to accomplish this end he inflicts harm upon a person other than the one intended, he is guilty of the same kind of crime as if his aim had been more accurate.' In such cases all the components of the crime are present. The physical element which consists of a certain general mental pattern is not varied by the particular person who may be actually harmed. Id. at 404, 330 A.2d at 188 (footnote omitted). The same statement is applicable here. Susan Kennedy's death was the result of a wilfull, deliberate, and premeditated intent to kill for which Grandison is responsible. There was no error in denying the motion.