Court Opinion

ID: 9644652
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 21:01:30.350509+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:16.377677
License: Public Domain

MACK, Senior Judge,
concurring:
I join Judge Ferren’s concurring opinion. I would emphasize, in addition, that I embrace the rationale of Maryland’s Ford1 decision (as recited in Judge Farrell’s footnote 8) that “Transferred intent does not make two crimes out of one.” As to Judge Farrell’s discussion of our cases construing the mens rea element of D.C.Code § 22-503 (1989)2 (decided on the basis of “common sense and evident statutory purpose”), I would also emphasize that the factual pattern in those cases reflected assaults on one victim with the intent to “effectuate” the commission of another crime against a second victim.

. Ford v. State, 330 Md. 682, 625 A.2d 984 (1993).

. See Moore v. United States, 508 A.2d 924 (D.C.1986) (per curiam), and Battle v. United States, 515 A.2d 1120 (D.C.1986).