Opinion ID: 2271140
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Perry is Still Good Law.

Text: Hall contends this Court noted in Holland v. Commonwealth that other jurisdictions have held that first-degree assault is not a lesser-included offense of attempted murder. Hall argues that Perry 's holding to the contrary [34] is no longer good law in light of our comments in Holland. [35] But we agree with the Commonwealth that we acknowledged other jurisdictions' holdings that assault is not a lesser-included offense in dictum in Holland. In Holland, we were not directly faced with a question of whether an assault instruction could be given as a lesser-included offense of attempted murder. [36] Despite our dictum in Holland suggesting that perhaps Perry ought to be re-examined in light of our embracing a same elements test for determining whether an offense is a lesser-included offense for double jeopardy purposes in Commonwealth v. Burge , we have not overruled Perry. Perry has continued to be cited in court cases and secondary sources for the specific proposition that first-degree assault can sometimes be a lesser-included offense of attempted murder. [37] And it is cited for the more general proposition that a strict statutory elements approach should not be utilized to determine if a trial court should instruct a jury on an unindicted offense as a lesser-included offense of a charged offense. Perry is cited as authority for allowing instructions on uncharged offenses where the facts alleged in the indictment or the evidence presented at trial supported such instructions. [38]