The Court of Appeals noted:
"In the case at hand, only one shot was fired, and Autman was in the restaurant, a different area of the building than Smith and Craig. Further, when asked if he was in the line of fire, Autman could not answer in the affirmative. Autman also noted that his diving to the floor caused him to be closer to where the bullet landed than where he was standing before the shot was fired. Craig testified that he had neither any intent to harm Autman nor any knowledge that Autman was even in the building. Further, no evidence was put forth at trial that Autman had any fear of being harmed when the shot was fired."
This is a very fact specific case. In reading the opinion, transferred intent was not found mainly because only one shot was fired. This opinion has one of the best explanations of intent and transferred intent in Mississippi that I know of.
No comments:
Post a Comment