• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
 Premeditated Murder (First Degree)
Case:
 
United States v. Watson
, 501 A.2d 791 (1985) [p. 330-334] Facts: Officer was pursuing the Δ for stealing a car. Δ ran into an apartment, made a phone call, and waited for the officer to arrive. When the officer came, the Δ resisted arrest, fought with the officer, and took his gun. Butrather than escaping, the Δ shot the officer while he was on the floor. The officer twice told Δ that "it wasn’tworth it," but Δ ignored and still killed him. Δ was convicted of first degree murder. Δ now appeals, arguingthere was insufficient evidence of premeditation and deliberation. Holding: The court held that there was in fact sufficient evidence, whereby a jury could conclude that that Δhad acted with premeditation and deliberation. Evidence was sufficient circumstantial evidence from which premeditation could be inferred:
•
When he ran into the apartment, he sat down at the table, and waited for officer to arrive. So, he hadtime to think about what he would do.
•
Δ did not flee when he had the opportunity to do so, and instead shot the officer when he was on thefloor, and did not pose a threat to him.
o
3 feet away from officer when he shot him - he could walk away
o
Successfully overpowered officer, had the gun, and could have left
•
Officer twice told him "it wasn’t worth it" but Δ still shot him
o
Officer pleading for his life - telling Δ its not worth it. But Δ still shoots him. Basically, he ismaking a decision after hearing what officer is telling him.
•
Timing - talked about girls leaving the room - they run 16-20 seconds before they heard the shotThere was sufficient time for the Δ to think about what he was doing, so sufficient evidence of deliberate acts. 
Class Notes
o
 No legal minimum to how long premeditation should take - just some time to think about it
o
Time - not just quantitative
o
Also qualitative - it was down time, quiet waiting for officer to show up; that he hadoverpowered officer, and quality time in deciding whether to kill him
 _________________________________________ 
 
Notes
: [p. 334-340]
o
Duration
o
"no specific amount of time is necessary to demonstrate premeditation and deliberation and thegovernment need not show a lapse of days, hours, or even minutes, but some appreciable timemust elapse.
o
State v. Bingham
(1986) - Δ strangled a mentally retarded woman to death. Lower court said that because the strangulation lasted at least 3 minutes, there was premeditation. State Supreme Courtreversed, holding that both the time for and the fact o deliberation are required, and that a reasonable jury cannot infer deliberation simply from the length of time.
o
Criteria of Premeditation
o
Appellate courts will often cite evidentiary factors in determining whether the evidence wassufficient to support a jury verdict of 1st degree murder 
o
Earlier hostility between the Δ and the victim (like a pattern of abusing the victim,spouse)
o
Self-interested motive (like a fight about money)
o
The manner and circumstances of the killing (interruption and subsequent continuation of the killing, where Δ adjusted gun during murder; where murder weapon, a hammer, waswrapped in cloth)
o
Δ's behavior before the killing (stalking victim)
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...