Opinion ID: 1173885
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Malicious Intent

Text: The intent to maim may be presumed from the circumstances connected with the commission of the act. One is presumed to intend the natural consequences of his act. Biting a portion of someone's ear to the extent that it becomes separated from the ear itself and then spitting out the dismembered portion of the organ would to a reasonable person infer that the assailant intended to disfigure. As we said in In re Ralls, 71 Nev. 276, 279, 288 P.2d 450, 451 (1955): It does not follow that a specific intent to maim must be proved. It may be inferred or presumed. To accomplish such an end, however, it is necessary that the disfigurement was reasonably to be apprehended as the natural and probable consequence of the act. [Citations omitted.] We believe the record of the preliminary hearing in this case is sufficient to establish malicious intent, particularly when Shirley added the comment after the assault, Good    go to the doctor and get it sewed.