Commonwealth v. Donton
439 Pa. Super. 406, 1995 Pa. Super. LEXIS 263, 654 A.2d 580 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An individual takes a substantial step toward the commission of a crime, sufficient for an attempt conviction, when they possess the requisite intent and complete acts such as preparing a weapon, traveling to the victim's location, and reconnoitering the area, even if they are apprehended before the final act.
Facts:
- In December 1992, Diana Donton separated from her husband, Herman Donton, and moved from Pike County to live with her mother in Berks County.
- In March 1993, Herman Donton told his son, David, that he was going to Reading to "take her out," referring to Diana.
- Herman Donton then had his son retrieve ammunition for his .30-06 rifle, which he proceeded to load.
- Before leaving, Donton wrote several letters, including a will and a note asking for forgiveness, which suggested a murder-suicide plan.
- Donton drove from his home in Pike County to Berks County, a distance of approximately ninety miles, with the loaded, scope-equipped rifle on the front seat of his car.
- Upon arriving at the street where Diana was staying, Donton twice drove very slowly past the residence, looking towards the home.
- When police initiated a stop, Donton was heading back toward the residence after turning around just past it.
- As an officer approached his vehicle, Donton reached for the loaded rifle on the front seat next to him.
Procedural Posture:
- Herman Donton was arrested and charged in a Pennsylvania trial court with attempted murder, aggravated assault, and other related crimes.
- At trial, the jury returned verdicts of guilty on all counts.
- Donton filed a timely appeal of his convictions and sentence to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, which is the intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a defendant take a substantial step toward the commission of murder when, with the stated intent to kill, he loads a rifle, drives 90 miles to his estranged wife's location, and is apprehended while slowly driving past the residence with the weapon beside him?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Beck
Yes, a defendant takes a substantial step toward the commission of murder under these circumstances. The modern definition of attempt focuses on the acts the defendant has already completed, rather than the acts that remain to be done. The court found that Donton's actions, viewed in their entirety, were far more compelling than those in prior cases that had affirmed attempt convictions. Citing Commonwealth v. Melnyczenko, the court held that Donton was apprehended while reconnoitering the area with both the specific intent to kill his wife and the sufficient means to carry out that intent. The combination of his statements, the letters, loading a high-powered rifle, driving ninety miles to the victim's location, and conducting surveillance constituted a clear and substantial step toward committing murder, making it unnecessary for the prosecution to prove he had already aimed or fired the weapon.
Analysis:
This case solidifies and expands the 'substantial step' element of the inchoate crime of attempt in Pennsylvania. By affirming the conviction based on acts of preparation and travel, the court reinforces a lower threshold for criminal liability than older 'overt act' standards required. The decision empowers law enforcement to intervene earlier to prevent a crime's completion, as it clarifies that a defendant need not be in the final moments of perpetrating the crime to be held liable for attempt. This precedent makes it easier for prosecutors to secure convictions in cases where a defendant has demonstrated clear intent and taken significant preparatory actions but is stopped before the final, harmful act occurs.
