Court Opinion

ID: 9789755
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 01:40:49.498326+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:34:08.905134
License: Public Domain

Herd, J.,
dissenting: A person is presumed to intend the logical consequences of his or her acts. State v. Gander, 220 Kan. 88, 90, 551 P.2d 797 (1976). Dixon was angry at Bell and jealous of her perceived association with another man. After consuming cocaine, he went to a distant location and obtained his .38 re*53volver, proceeded to the house where Bell was, shot her in the chin, and stated: “If I can’t have you, can’t nobody else have you.” Defendant’s actions speak louder than his later contrived words that he intended only to scare Bell. The logical consequences of Dixon’s angrily going for his loaded gun and pointing it at Bell was a shooting, willfully and with premeditation. I find no credible evidence of attempted murder in the second degree. I would affirm the trial court.