Opinion ID: 775226
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Specific Intent/Aggravated Murder

Text: 67 Petitioner argues that the trial court erred by replacing the element of specific intent, required by Ohio Revised Code 2903.01 (D) to find one guilty of aggravated murder, with proximate cause. Specifically, Petitioner argues that the trial court instructed the jury that to find Petitioner guilty of aggravated murder, the jury need only find that Petitioner was the principal offender in the aggravated burglary, not in the aggravated murder. 68 The crime of aggravated murder under Ohio law states, no person shall purposely, and with prior calculation and design, cause the death of another[.] Ohio Rev. Code 2903.01(A). The trial court instructed the jury as follows: 69 Before you can find the defendant guilty of aggravated murder . . . you must find that . . . defendant purposely caused [Storey's] death with prior calculation and design . . . . Purpose to kill is an essential element of the crime of aggravated murder. A person acts purposely when it is a specific intention to cause a certain result. It must be established in this count, that at the time in question, there was present in the mind of the defendant a specific intention to kill Tonnie Storey . . . . No person may be convicted of aggravated murder unless he is specifically found to have intended to cause the death of another. 70 (J.A. at 2419-20). 71 Contrary to Petitioner's assertions, the jury instructions did not communicate that finding Petitioner to be the principal offender in the burglary was sufficient for finding guilt as to aggravated murder. Rather, the jury instructions clearly stated that finding Petitioner guilty of aggravated murder required finding that Petitioner purposely caused [Storey's] death with prior calculation and design.