§ 2-2 Attempted Murder
The defendant is charged with the statutory offense of attempted murder. In order to prove this offense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant, with the intent to kill, attempted to kill another person with malice aforethought.
As to the element of intent, intent means the mental resolution or determination to do an act and is the state of mind accompanying an act. Intent may be shown by acts and conduct of the defendant and other circumstances from which you may naturally and reasonably infer intent. In order to prove this offense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant possessed a specific intent to kill another person. A specific intent to kill another person is a required element of the offense.
As to the element of attempt, an attempt is an effort to accomplish a crime which does not succeed. An attempt includes a specific intent to do a particular criminal act along with an act falling short of the act intended. The State must show more than mere preparation and intent. There must be some overt act committed in the effort to commit the crime. In order to prove this offense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant attempted to kill another person.
As to the element of malice and malice aforethought, malice is hatred, ill-will, or hostility towards another person. It is the intentional doing of a wrongful act without just cause or excuse. Malice aforethought does not require that malice exists for any particular time before the act is committed, but malice must exist in the mind of the defendant just before and at that time of the act committed. Therefore, there must be a combination of the previous evil intent and the act. In order to prove this offense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant acted with malice aforethought.
The required elements of the offense may be established by direct evidence, circumstantial evidence, or a combination of the two.
? State v. King, 422 S.C. 47, 55-64, 810 S.E.2d 18, 22-27 (2017):
We agree with the Court of Appeals that "the Legislature intended to require the State to prove specific intent to commit murder as an element of attempted murder, and therefore the trial court erred by charging the jury that attempted murder is a general intent crime." State v. King, 412 S.C. 403, 411, 772 S.E.2d 189, 193 (Ct. App. 2015). Because the phrase "with intent to kill" in section 16-3-29 does not identify what level of...
