Opinion ID: 2069678
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Third Degree Murder Instruction

Text: In yet another challenge to the trial court's jury instructions, Appellant alleges error in the trial court's definition of third degree murder. His specific argument is that the instruction was deficient because it did not tell the jury that third degree murder requires an intent to cause serious bodily injury that results in death. To prove third degree murder, the Commonwealth must establish a malicious killing, but not a specific intent to kill. 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502(a), (c). Third degree murder requires malice, but contrary to Appellant's arguments, it does not require a specific intent to cause serious bodily injury. Accordingly, the trial court was not required to give such an instruction to the jury. What the trial court did give was a thorough instruction concerning the elements of first and third degree murder, which included the following: So, you may find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree, murder in the third degree or not guilty. I shall define those crimes for you. First, whatever degree of murder, there is an element which we call malice. If there is no malice, there is no murder. Malice consists of either an express intent to kill or an express intent to inflict great bodily harm or of a wickedness of disposition, hardness of heart, cruelty, recklessness of consequences and a mind regardless of social duty, which indicates an unjustified disregard for the likelihood of death or great bodily harm, and an extreme indifference to the value of human life. Legal malice may be inferred and found from the attending circumstances of the act resulting in the death.. . . I charge you now on murder in the third degree. Murder in the third degree includes all unlawful killings under circumstances of depravity of heart, and a disposition of mind regardless of social duty, but where no intention to kill exists or can be reasonably or fully inferred. Like murder in the first degree, malice must be found in order to constitute murder in the third degree. In murder in the third degree, however, there is no intent to kill, but the intent is only to do great bodily harm. Therefore, in order to find the defendant guilty of murder in the third degree, you must find that the following elements have been established beyond a reasonable doubt: that the defendant caused the death of another person, and that the defendant acted with malice and with an intent to do great bodily harm but not to kill. N.T. 2/24/95, pp. 62-65. This portion of the jury instruction demonstrates that the trial court did instruct the jury that the definition of malice, which must be present for third degree murder, includes an intent to do great bodily harm. Appellant's claim must therefore fail. Moreover, after reviewing the trial court's murder instruction in its entirety, we are satisfied that it clearly, adequately, and accurately provided the jury with the law on first and third degree murder. See Commonwealth v. Chambers, 546 Pa. 370, 382, 685 A.2d 96, 102 (1996), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 90, 139 L.Ed.2d 46 (1997) (trial court has broad discretion in phrasing jury instructions, and may choose its own wording as long as the law is clearly, adequately and accurately presented to the jury).