{"id":1285,"date":"2017-09-27T17:43:48","date_gmt":"2017-09-27T17:43:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-fmcc-criminallaw\/?post_type=chapter&p=1285"},"modified":"2019-07-05T16:06:48","modified_gmt":"2019-07-05T16:06:48","slug":"9-3-first-degree-murder","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-criminallaw\/chapter\/9-3-first-degree-murder\/","title":{"raw":"9.3 First-Degree Murder","rendered":"9.3 First-Degree Murder"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n

Learning Objectives<\/h3>\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. Ascertain the three types of murder that are typically first degree.<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. Define premeditated murder.<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. Explain the significance of the criminal act element of murder in premeditated murder.<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. Define murder by a specified means.<\/li>\r\n \t
  5. Give examples of specified means for first-degree murder.<\/li>\r\n \t
  6. Analyze first-degree murder grading.<\/li>\r\n \t
  7. Ascertain the circumstances that merit capital punishment.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    In this section, you analyze the factors<\/em> that classify a murder as first-degree murder<\/a><\/span>. Keep in mind that the criminal act, criminal intent, causation, and harm elements of murder have already been discussed.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Factors Classifying Murder as First Degree<\/h3>\r\n

    States and the federal government usually include premeditated murder<\/a><\/span>, murder by a specified means<\/a><\/span>, and very serious felony murders<\/strong> in their first-degree murder statutes. Felony murder is discussed shortly.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Premeditated Murder<\/h3>\r\n

    Premeditated murder was originally and historically the predominant form of murder in any first-degree murder statute. A common statutory definition of first-degree premeditated murder is a willful, deliberate, premeditated killing (Mich. Comp. Laws, 2010).<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Definition of Willful, Deliberate, and Premeditated<\/h3>\r\n

    Most jurisdictions define willful<\/a><\/span> as a specific intent to kill<\/strong>, purposely<\/strong>, or express malice<\/em>. Jurisdictions differ when interpreting deliberate<\/a><\/span> and premeditated<\/a><\/span>. A minority of jurisdictions equate express malice or purposely with deliberation and premeditation, which means that the prosecution need only prove specific intent to kill for a first-degree premeditated murder conviction (Hawthorne v. State, 2010). However, this interpretation could blur the distinction between first and second-degree murder. The majority of jurisdictions have defined deliberate<\/em> as calm and methodical, without passion or anger (People v. Anderson, 2011). Premeditated<\/em> generally means the defendant reflected on the act or planned ahead (People v. Cole, 2011). In other words, if the defendant specifically intends to kill the victim and rationally, purposefully, takes steps that culminate in the victim\u2019s death, the defendant has committed first-degree premeditated murder in many jurisdictions.<\/p>\r\n

    Often it is the act itself that proves the killing was willful, deliberate, and premeditated. If the killing is carried out in a manner that indicates a strong and calculated desire to bring about the victim\u2019s death, the trier of fact can and often does conclude that the murder was premeditated (State v. Snowden, 2010).<\/p>\r\n

    Most jurisdictions agree that an extended period of time<\/em> is not a requirement of premeditation (Commonwealth v. Carroll, 2010). Thus a murder can be premeditated and first degree even if it is conceived only moments before the actual killing (State v. Schrader, 2010). Some jurisdictions do not require any<\/em> appreciable time lapse between the formation of intent and the criminal act (State v. Snowden, 2010).<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Example of a Willful, Deliberate, Premeditated Murder<\/h3>\r\n

    Imagine that Joannie and her husband Tim are in a terrible fight in the kitchen. Tim tells Joannie that he is going to get a divorce and will thereafter seek full custody of their two young children. Joannie states, \u201cWait here. I need to go to the bathroom. I will be right back.\u201d She walks down the hall, but goes into the bedroom<\/em>, rather than the bathroom, and removes a handgun from the nightstand drawer. She then walks to the bathroom and flushes the toilet. Hiding the handgun in the pocket of her bathrobe, she walks back into the kitchen, removes it, and shoots Tim four times in the abdomen, killing him.<\/p>\r\n

    In this scenario, Joannie probably could be convicted of premeditated murder in most jurisdictions. Joannie shoots and kills Tim in a calm, methodical manner, evidencing deliberation<\/strong>. Her manufactured excuse and flushing of the toilet indicate planning<\/strong>. The act of shooting Tim four times shows that Joannie has a specific intent to kill<\/strong> and a strong and calculated desire to bring about Tim\u2019s death. Note that timing<\/em> is not an issue here. Even a few minutes are enough to carry out a premeditated murder if the proper facts are present.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Example of a Spontaneous Killing<\/h3>\r\n

    Compare the previous example with this scenario. Frank, Dillon\u2019s supervisor, calls Dillon into his office and fires him. Enraged, Dillon grabs a heavy brass paperweight from the top of Frank\u2019s desk and strikes him in the forehead, killing him instantly. In this example, Dillon acts in anger<\/em>, not calm, cool, reflection. The act of grabbing a heavy brass paperweight appears impulsive<\/em>, not planned. There is no evidence to indicate that Dillon knew he would be fired or knew that there was a brass paperweight on Frank\u2019s desk. In addition, the single blow to the head does not necessarily indicate that Dillon had a strong and calculated desire to kill<\/em> Frank. Dillon\u2019s conduct may be supported by murder intent<\/strong> (most likely implied malice, knowingly, or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life), but there is no evidence of specific intent to kill, deliberation, or premeditation. Thus Frank\u2019s killing would probably not be first-degree premeditated murder in most jurisdictions.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Murder by a Specified Means<\/h3>\r\n

    Murder by a specified means<\/strong> is a specific method<\/em> of killing that is extremely heinous. Most states list the specified means in their first-degree murder statutes. Some examples of commonly included specified means are murder by drive-by shooting, destructive device like a bomb, weapon of mass destruction, ammunition designed to puncture a bulletproof vest, poison, torture, or lying in wait<\/a><\/span>, which is an ambush-style killing (Cal. Penal Code, 2010). Note that all the aforementioned methods<\/em> of killing involve premeditation to a certain extent and could also probably qualify as first-degree premeditated murder.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n
    \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"1250\"]\"Diagram Figure 9.3<\/strong> Diagram of First-Degree Murder[\/caption]\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
    \r\n

    First-Degree Murder Grading<\/h3>\r\n

    Most states divide murder into first<\/strong> and second degree<\/strong> (N.R.S., 2011). Some states add a third degree<\/strong> of murder that generally includes less serious sentencing options (Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann., 2010). The Model Penal Code classifies all<\/em> murders as felonies of the first degree (Model Penal Code \u00a7\u00a0210.2(2)).<\/p>\r\n

    First-degree murder is the highest classification of murder and results in the most extreme punishment available in a jurisdiction\u2019s punishment scheme. If the jurisdiction allows for the death penalty, first-degree murder typically is the only crime against an individual that qualifies the defendant for execution (N.R.S., 2011). If the jurisdiction does not allow for the death penalty, first-degree murder often qualifies the defendant for life in prison<\/em> (Mich. Comp. Laws, 2011).<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Capital Punishment<\/h3>\r\n

    The US Supreme Court has held that criminal homicide is the only<\/em> crime against an individual that can merit the death penalty (Kennedy v. Louisiana, 2010). A discussion of crimes against the government (such as treason) that merit the death penalty is in Chapter 13 \"Crimes against the Government\"<\/a>.<\/p>\r\n

    In states that allow capital punishment, first-degree murder with one or more aggravating factor<\/a><\/span>(s) is generally a capital offense. Examples of aggravating factors are killing more than one person, killing for financial gain, killing with a particularly heinous method, or killing a peace officer (Death Penalty Information Center 1, 2010). In general, the trier of fact must ensure that the aggravating factor(s) are not outweighed by mitigating factor<\/a><\/span>(s). Examples of mitigating factors are the youth of the defendant, the defendant\u2019s lack of a criminal history, and the fact that the defendant was acting under extreme emotional or mental disturbance (Death Penalty Information Center 2, 2010).<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n
    \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"1854\"]\"Diagram Figure 9.4<\/strong> Diagram of Capital Punishment[\/caption]\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n
    \r\n

    The Peterson Case<\/h4>\r\n

    A jury convicted Scott Peterson of first-degree premeditated murder for the killing of his pregnant wife Laci Peterson. They also convicted him of second-degree murder for the killing of his unborn son Conner (Montaldo, C. 1, 2010). The governing statute was California Penal Code \u00a7\u00a0189 (Cal. Penal Code, 2010). After issuing the verdict, the jury sentenced Peterson to death based on the special circumstance of killing more than one person (Montaldo, C. 2, 2010).<\/p>\r\n

    The prosecution was successful without direct evidence<\/em> or proof of the cause of death<\/em> (Montaldo, C. 1, 2010).<\/p>\r\n

    Congress was inspired by the Peterson case to pass the Unborn Victims of Violence Act<\/strong><\/a>, 18 U.S.C. \u00a7\u00a01841 (18 U.S.C., 2010), creating the new federal crime of killing an unborn child.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Key Takeaways<\/h3>\r\n